.
Greg Dritschler
I have a couple of more questions about intent inheritance.
(1) The Java CI spec shows examples of putting interaction (binding) intent
annotations in classes. For example:
@Integrity(transport)
@Authentication
public class HelloService {
@Integrity
@Authentication(message)
public String
'.
Thanks
- Venkat
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Greg Dritschler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ok. Please be aware there is an errata associated with the
authorization
elements.
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-26
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:51 AM, Venkata Krishnan
are where intents and policyset actually matter.
If
specified in any other levle its only for convenience so as to cover a
whole
bunch of child elements.
Am I trying to overly simply things here missing some key point ?
Thanks
- Venkat
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Greg Dritschler
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-2239:
-
Attachment: tuscany-2239-CompositeWireBuilder.patch
Support for mutually-exclusive
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-2239:
-
Attachment: (was: tuscany-2239-CompositeWireBuilder.patch)
Support for mutually
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-2239:
-
Attachment: tuscany-2239-CompositeWireBuilder.patch
Support for mutually-exclusive
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12590785#action_12590785
]
Greg Dritschler commented on TUSCANY-2239:
--
I have attached a new patch
: Improvement
Components: Java SCA Core Runtime
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Change DefaultContextFactoryExtensionPoint to use ServiceDiscovery to find
implementation of context factory.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-2246:
-
Attachment: tuscany-2246.patch
Update DefaultContextFactoryExtensionPoint to use
could be added later if someone has an interest in them.
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Mike Edwards
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Dritschler (JIRA) wrote:
Support for mutually-exclusive intents
--
Key: TUSCANY-2239
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
The SCA Policy specification does not provide a means to define intents which
are mutually exclusive. This is a noticeable omission when considering the
intents in the SCA Transaction specification which are mutually exclusive by
nature (managedTransaction vs
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-2239:
-
Attachment: tuscany-2239.patch
Support for mutually-exclusive intents
The transaction itest has some policy issues.
WARNING: Policy related exception:
org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.builder.impl.PolicyComputationException: The
following are unfulfilled intents for component implementation -
TransferServiceComponent
Unfulfilled Intents = [{
ugly and not going to go very far. I am going to change this to
explicitly
execute read, resolve and build phases and simply verify against the built
up composite.
Thanks
- Venkat
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What is the status
like
TestImplPolicyHandler is quite happy if various other policy sets are
selected, such TestPolicySet_1_implementation or
TestPolicySet_2_implementation. What's the story?
Greg Dritschler
penalty on
write for no penalty on traversal sounds like a good idea. The write
penalty could be mitigated by batching updates; i.e. instead of adding new
intents, policy sets, etc. to the lists one-by-one, collect them and make
one update to each list.
Greg Dritschler
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5
Oops, meant to say ...than contributions adding definitions.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ramkumar,
Sorry for the delay in responding. I think you are probably right that
CopyOnWriteArrayList is the way to go. Presumably there will be far more
Yang, see replies within.
Greg Dritschler
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Yang Lei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I am interested in knowing how Tuscany supports SCA Assembly Spec 1.0
section 1.8
1.8 SCA Definitions
2491 There are a variety of SCA artifacts which are generally useful
-2171
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Java SCA Core Runtime
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-1.0.1
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
I have a definitions.xml file which defines a bindingType for binding.sca.
bindingType type=sca:binding.sca
Project: Tuscany
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Java SCA Core Runtime
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-1.0.1
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
A contribution may contain a definitions.xml document that defines intents
and/or policy sets. When such a contribution is removed, I
Hi. I have noticed that there doesn't seem to be a way to remove
definitions (policy sets etc) from the domain. The specs don't explicitly
say how this would happen, but surely this can't be a one-way process (you
can add but can't delete). I can only guess that if definitions are added
as part
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
java.util.ConcurrentModificationException
at java.util.AbstractList$SimpleListIterator.next(Unknown Source)
at
org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.ExtensibleContributionListener.contributionAdded(ExtensibleContributionListener.java:40
I have a question about this method in CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.
private SCABinding createSCABinding() {
SCABinding scaBinding = scaBindingFactory.createSCABinding();
IntentAttachPointType bindingType =
intentAttachPointTypeFactory.createBindingType();
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-1.0.1
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
I have a service with a web service binding that processes its input using an
SDO. The service works fine with one client. It also works fine if it is
driven once by one client and then driven by multiple clients
not belong
to
the same namespace. Do you share this thought ?
Thanks
- Venkat
If a PolicySet name does not have a prefix it assumes the targetNamespace.
If a
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Greg Dritschler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Venkat,
I was trying some stuff with policy sets
have
re-read Mike's explanation in this thread, it does seem like you have a
point.
- Venkat
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Greg Dritschler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No. The type of @name is either NCName or QName. It cannot be both.
If it
is an NCName, then it cannot
Venkat,
I was trying some stuff with policy sets and noticed the QName resolution
wasn't working as I expected. Specifically the targetNameSpace attribute of
the definitions.xml document doesn't appear to be used to form the QName of
the policy sets within. I recalled we had discussed this in
plate at the moment. Thanks.
- Venkat
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Dritschler wrote:
Is the authentication policy going to bear any resemblance to the
policy
described in section 1.7.3.1 of the Policy spec, or is it completely
AM, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been looking at the PolicyHandler support for Java
implementations
and overall I like the direction this is going. I have some comments
about
it.
1. If a given component/operation has multiple policy sets that are
handled
Raymond,
Your proposal works for me.
On Feb 4, 2008 11:47 AM, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please see my comments below.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008
I have been looking at the PolicyHandler support for Java implementations
and overall I like the direction this is going. I have some comments about
it.
1. If a given component/operation has multiple policy sets that are handled
by the same PolicyHandler, it appears that one PolicyHandler is
the intent if it has been
removed. I think the code needs to be changed to preserve these intents in
the intent attach point and just skip over them when looking for matching
policy sets.
Greg Dritschler
matching policy sets, removes intents that are found in mayProvide from the
model object. In that case, how would the binding/implementation know it
should provide the intent functionality if the intent isn't present in the
model anymore?
Greg Dritschler
: Bug
Components: Java SCA Assembly Model
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-1.0
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Priority: Minor
I have an SCA composite that uses both a property element and an import.sdo
element. If the property element appears before the import.sdo element
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1949?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12555995#action_12555995
]
Greg Dritschler commented on TUSCANY-1949:
--
Can property elements have extension
to have static wires in the forward direction and only a dynamic
wire in the callback direction.
Greg Dritschler
On Aug 21, 2007 11:00 AM, Simon Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Comments inline.
Simon
Raymond Feng wrote:
Comments inline.
Thanks,
Raymond
- Original Message
was copied from
JDKInvocationHandler. This method makes no sense to me in an inbound
dispatch context.
Greg Dritschler
On Oct 18, 2007 10:32 AM, Simon Laws [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
Similar code for handling conversational state as appears in the
JDKInvocationHandler has been added
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1765?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-1765:
-
Attachment: TUSCANY-1765.patch
BaseJavaImplementationImpl.equals is modified to call
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-0.99
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Priority: Minor
Suppose there is a composite with multiple components that use the same
implementation class but different implementation intents, as shown below.
composite xmlns=http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0
I have a question about changes that were made in revision 566649. This
revision changed the assembly model object interfaces so that they don't
extend IntentAttachPoint. The assembly model implementations now extend
IntentAttachPoint. As a consequence any code that wants to reference the
SCA Core Runtime
Affects Versions: Java-SCA-0.90
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Priority: Minor
A patch is submitted that allows Tuscany's implementation of the WorkScheduler
SPI, Jsr237WorkScheduler, to be plug-replaced by another implementation. The
patch uses
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1554?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-1554:
-
Attachment: Tuscany-1554.patch
Support alternate WorkScheduler implementations
The policy framework spec says the @name attribute is a QName and even gives
an example where the namespace prefix is used:
intent name=acme:messageProtection
constrains=sca:binding
requires=confidentiality integrity
description
Protect messages from
Oops, I see that
ReferenceBindingProvider2.supportsAsyncOneWayInvocationaccomplishes
what I want to do. Thanks.
On 8/3/07, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A NonBlockingInterceptor is inserted into invocation chains for all oneway
methods. This causes a problem when a component
On 5/1/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More comments inline.
Greg Dritschler wrote:
Replies within.
On 4/30/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking about policy, but why limit it? Shouldn't it have access
to
the complete model and sufficient
Components: Java SCA Standalone Runtime
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
The current runtime implementations are capable of starting a single composite
only. This isn't very usable outside a standalone environment.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1242?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-1242:
-
Attachment: jira.patch
The patch is a first step at providing a Tuscany runtime
Replies within.
On 4/30/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Dritschler wrote:
The WirePostProcessor is passed a Wire from which it can find the
source and
target contract and the source and target URI. If it needs context
from the
SCDL that is not in the contracts
Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg Dritschler wrote:
This is a bit of a nit. It appears that the
SCARuntime.getComponentContextdoes not work if the given component is
implemented by another composite.
For example SCARuntime.getComponentContext(CalculatorServiceComponent)
returns null when
On 4/24/07, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also wondering about the code in DeployerImpl.deploy that connects
objects. It starts as follows:
// Connect components, services and references
ListSCAObject scaObjects = componentManager.getSCAObjects ();
Is it fair
it organizes its list of SCAObjects.
On 4/25/07, Greg Dritschler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm still having difficulty with the cardinality of the
ContributionService and related services (ComponentManager, Deployer) and
have to think about it some more.
This is a bit of a nit. It appears that the
SCARuntime.getComponentContextdoes not work if the given component is
implemented by another composite.
For example SCARuntime.getComponentContext(CalculatorServiceComponent)
returns null when CalculatorServiceComponent has a composite implementation.
the code
building the wires has the source and target objects, couldn't it just pass
them to the postprocessor?
Greg Dritschler
,
this says to me that every time a composite is deployed, all registered SCA
objects are going to be connected. If multiple contributions are deployed
is that what should happen?
Greg Dritschler
On 4/25/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure that there's a 1..1 relationship between application and
contribution.
No, there isn't. In trying to switch terminology from application to
contribution, I mistakenly implied an equivalence which isn't true. But you
Regarding case 2, as far as I know the only place in the Java Common
Annotations spec that touches on the behavior of annotations with respect to
inheritance is chapter 2 on policy annotations. It says that the rules of
JSR 250 apply. According to JSR 250 annotations on hidden class members are
I believe He Yuan's point is the requirement on Java 1.5. WAS6.0 is Java
1.4.
I will follow up with He Yuan offline.
Greg
On 12/1/06, Jim Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 1, 2006, at 6:23 AM, He Yuan Huang wrote:
Dears,
Currently, we are working on migrating a SCA IBM Internal
I've tried out the suggested fixes and I have run into a big problem.
By proxying the inbound wire of the composite reference, there is no
databinding interceptor in the invocation chain. This causes
Axis2TargetInvoker to choke.
Exception java.lang.IllegalArgumentException Exception message:
?
Jim
On Nov 30, 2006, at 6:51 AM, Greg Dritschler wrote:
I've tried out the suggested fixes and I have run into a big problem.
By proxying the inbound wire of the composite reference, there is no
databinding interceptor in the invocation chain. This causes
Axis2TargetInvoker to choke
: Java-Mx
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Submission of basic integration tests for @Scope, @Callback, @Oneway, and
@Remotable.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-940?page=all ]
Greg Dritschler updated TUSCANY-940:
Attachment: itest.zip
Test cases for scope, callback, oneway
--
Key: TUSCANY-940
SCA Core
Affects Versions: Java-Mx
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Priority: Minor
In M1, the HttpSessionScopeContainer was able to lazy-initialize an HTTP
session. (Look at the class LazyHTTPSessionId to see how it worked.) Now the
HttpSessionScopeContainer requires
: Java SCA Core
Affects Versions: Java-Mx
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Using a wire element in a composite results in an exception.
org.apache.tuscany.spi.loader.UnrecognizedElementException:
{http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0}wire
[{http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0}wire]
Context
Affects Versions: Java-Mx
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Priority: Minor
The invocation handler and target invoker have code to support caching the
target instance to avoid doing a container lookup every time the target is
invoked. However no code exists to turn caching
Affects Versions: Java-Mx
Reporter: Greg Dritschler
Using @Scope(REQUEST) in an implementation class causes the following error
at build time.
[INFO]
[INFO] Scope object factory not registered for scope [REQUEST
it would be made general enough for other things (QOS) to piggyback
on top of it.
Greg Dritschler
is no longer instantiated. Is this broken or has
this been replaced by some other mechanism?
Greg Dritschler
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
68 matches
Mail list logo
