Hi, Am Dienstag, den 26.02.2008, 15:28 +0100 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler: > Felix Meschberger wrote: > >> Therefore I propose the following changes: > >> a) move the service locator to the scripting package > > > > in the API ? I would leave the interface exactly where it is. IMHO there > > is no reason to move this. > > > Yes, I thought of moving it from the o.a.s.api.services to the > o.a.s.api.scripting package. The reason for the move is that scripting > is the only user of this service.
But then considering, that ServiceLocator is only used in scripts and ServiceLocator is in the scripting package: Why not move the whole API into the SlingScriptHelper interface and drop the ServiceLocator interface altogether ? > > But I'm fine with leaving it in a separate package as well (though I > never liked the "services" name :) ) Agreed, but it sounds somehwat logical. Regards Felix > > Carsten > > > It makes sense, though, to move the ServiceLocatorImpl class from the > > core to the scripting/resolver module. > > > >> b) add the service locator to the available bindings for a script > > > > +1 > > > >> c) change all scripting implementations so they make the locator > >> available to the scripts > > > > +1 > > > > Actually, it probably is enough to modify the DefaultSlingScript to > > ensure the ServiceLocator is part of the bindings used to call scripts. > > > >> d) remove the getServiceLocator() method from the request. > > > > +1 > > > >> There is one additional usage of the service locator: the scheduler > >> bundle can provide the locator during execution of a job. The basic idea > >> was to make the life of scheduled job developers easier. But I think > >> that in the end this is the wrong approach. So for a cleaner solution I > >> propose: > >> e) Remove the service locator support from the scheduler. > > > > +1 > > > > Should the scheduler run scripts, the ServiceLocator will be part of the > > bound variables and hence the scripts have the ServiceLocator. > > > >> Btw, the changes should have minimal impact. > > > > Yes, unless we move the ServiceLocator interface, which I propose not to > > do. > > > > Regards > > Felix > > > >> WDYT? > >> Carsten > >> > >> [1] > >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-sling-dev/200802.mbox/[EMAIL > >> PROTECTED] > >> > > > > > >
