On Feb 9, 2007, at 2:32 PM, Scott Kurz wrote:
Hi,
I was just looking back on this thread and wondering where we ended
up.
Did the Java C&I spec and/or any IRC discussions add some clarity
here?
It seems a shame to lose the simple syntax in the more common case to
support the strange case where the service name really needs pkg
qualification. It's probably too late to point this out but the
spec could
deal with this by saying that in this edge case the default service
name
includes pkg qualification while in the more typical case the
service name
is calculated as the unqualified intf name.
I haven't forgot but we've been dealing with so many other spec
issues, including the API changes, that I figured we would deal with
this in the 1.1 version of the specs. I think the solution you
outlined is good (i.e. default to the simple name when possible) and
in the case where there is more than one simple name, either use the
fully qualified name or allow an annotation to specify an alias.
I wonder if everyone is using single-service components and
bypassing this
issue...
No I think multiple services will be common enough we should support
something per the above. If you're interested in working on a patch,
I'd be happy to help if needed.
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
