Hi,
What java classes do you expect to be annotated with SCA annotations in the
OSGi bundle?
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rajini Sivaram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 4:05 AM
Subject: Re: implementation.osgi and SCA annotations
Ant,
The defaults used by implementation.osgi match the default behaviour of
OSGi
bundles. Scope is set to COMPOSITE, remotable interfaces use
pass-by-value,
and properties can only be set/read using standard OSGi mechanisms. The
attributes provided in <implementation.osgi/> which are being replaced by
annotations provide support for SCA options in OSGi bundles, but these
require changes to the bundle anyway. So it makes sense to add these
additional properties in a way that is consistent with SCA, rather than
add
something which is neither consistent with OSGi nor SCA.
Thank you...
Regards,
Rajini
On 8/30/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If thats the way to go then doing it now would be better than after 1.0
is
out.
But why can't the SCDL attributes be kept as well as supporting
annotations
and doesn't supporting both then mean non-SCA aware OSGi bundles can
still
be used with Tuscany? (not particularly concerned about this,would just
like
to understand)
...ant
On 8/30/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ant,
>
> Thank you.
>
> I was planning to remove the support for <implementation.osgi/>
> attributes,
> making it not backward compatible. That was one of the reasons I wanted
to
> introduce the change before 1.0. Is that a problem?
>
> Thank you...
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
>
>
>
> On 8/30/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/29/07, Rajini Sivaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > We would like to start supporting SCA annotations in implementation
> > > classes
> > > used inside OSGi bundles to make implementation.osgi consistent
> > > with
> > > implementation.java.
> > >
> > > In the current implementation, SCA annotations are only supported
for
> > > annotations used in interfaces, since we were keen on supporting
> > existing
> > > OSGi bundles without any change. This meant that additional SCA
> > properties
> > > like @AllowsPassByReference had to be supported through additional
> > > attributes on the <implementation.osgi/> element. But since these
> > > properties
> > > do not have an OSGi equivalent, they cannot be used with existing
OSGi
> > > bundles, and for new implementations which support these
> > > properties,
> we
> > > would like to support SCA annotations to make the OSGi
implementation
> > > consistent with the Java implementation.
> > >
> > > This is a fairly big change in implementation.osgi, and I would
> > > like
> > your
> > > views on whether this is a good time to make the change, so that
> > > the implementation will reflect the long-term strategy in the next
> > > release.
> > > I can submit a patch early next week if it can be integrated before
> the
> > > release.
> >
> >
> > If you think it can be done in time then I think you should go for
> > it,
> i'd
> > commit any patches for you. The next release is 1.0 with the branch
for
> > that being taken around the 14th of September. If you can get patches
> > submitted by at least a few days before then and the testcases and
> samples
> > are working after the changes then I can't see any problem with going
> > ahead
> > now.
> >
> > Just to confirm one thing, are the changes going to be backward
> > compatible,
> > i.e. would SCDL that works today keep on working after the changes
> > are
> > done?
> >
> > ...ant
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
