[jira] [Commented] (TUSCANY-3924) Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13204341#comment-13204341 ] Simon Laws commented on TUSCANY-3924: - I'm seeing the same Raymond. I don't think my approach is good so am about to revert some of it. I had a chat offline with Mike Edwards and I think we need to rethink the interpretation of the spec (which is not clear in this area) as I'm feeling uncomfortable about the code ignoring base class information. Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties -- Key: TUSCANY-3924 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924 Project: Tuscany Issue Type: Bug Components: Java SCA Assembly Model Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.x Reporter: Vijai Kalathur Assignee: Simon Laws Fix For: Java-SCA-2.x In the scenario where the Service impl class extends a class which has no SCA annotations in it, protected fields in the base class are interpreted like Properties. Ideally, only the fields in the impl class should be introspected for References/Properties. The fields in the base class should not be interpreted as References/Properties if there are no SCA annotations. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (TUSCANY-3924) Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13203979#comment-13203979 ] Raymond Feng commented on TUSCANY-3924: --- The changes seem to cause a regression where the base class has SCA annotated fields as references or properties. Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties -- Key: TUSCANY-3924 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924 Project: Tuscany Issue Type: Bug Components: Java SCA Assembly Model Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.x Reporter: Vijai Kalathur Assignee: Simon Laws Fix For: Java-SCA-2.x In the scenario where the Service impl class extends a class which has no SCA annotations in it, protected fields in the base class are interpreted like Properties. Ideally, only the fields in the impl class should be introspected for References/Properties. The fields in the base class should not be interpreted as References/Properties if there are no SCA annotations. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (TUSCANY-3924) Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13087750#comment-13087750 ] Scott Kurz commented on TUSCANY-3924: - Why wouldn't the fields in the base class be treated as Property(s)? Without any specific direction from the spec, I'd have just guessed the base fields would be treated as such? Can you give some motivation for why it should be different? Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties -- Key: TUSCANY-3924 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924 Project: Tuscany Issue Type: Bug Components: Java SCA Assembly Model Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.x Reporter: Vijai Kalathur Fix For: Java-SCA-2.x In the scenario where the Service impl class extends a class which has no SCA annotations in it, protected fields in the base class are interpreted like Properties. Ideally, only the fields in the impl class should be introspected for References/Properties. The fields in the base class should not be interpreted as References/Properties if there are no SCA annotations. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (TUSCANY-3924) Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13087957#comment-13087957 ] Simon Nash commented on TUSCANY-3924: - I believe the rationale is that the subclass (== component implemention class) can force any of these inherited fields to be a property by having the subclass define a setter method for the field and annotating the setter method with @Property. So by having the default be that these inherited fields are not properties and also providing a mechanism for the subclass to make them into properties, all options are possible. However, if these inherited fields were properties by default, I don't think there is any way that the subclass (== component implemention class) could prevent any of these fields from being a property. Inherited fields in service impl classes are treated as Properties -- Key: TUSCANY-3924 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3924 Project: Tuscany Issue Type: Bug Components: Java SCA Assembly Model Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.x Reporter: Vijai Kalathur Fix For: Java-SCA-2.x In the scenario where the Service impl class extends a class which has no SCA annotations in it, protected fields in the base class are interpreted like Properties. Ideally, only the fields in the impl class should be introspected for References/Properties. The fields in the base class should not be interpreted as References/Properties if there are no SCA annotations. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
