Hi Simon,

What I need is a hook into the runtime startup and more specifically after
the build phase so that I can analyse the built composite to see if it has
the correctly computed intents and policysets.  Is that something we can do
in the node-runtime?

Thanks

-  Venkat


On Dec 23, 2007 10:58 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Venkat
>
> Why do you say you had to almost rewrite the host-embeded
> runtime to make a itest work in this scenario? Is the something we can do
> with the node runtime to help you out here?
>
> Simon
>
> On Dec 23, 2007 4:45 PM, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've made some additions to the policy annotations processing.  I have
> > posted the rules of interpretation on another thread.  I've also now
> added
> > the code to pick up policies specified in the componentType.
> >
> > Ideally I would have liked to have a testcase to verify this and it
> seems
> > like I'd have to do a bit more than a unit test since I must rope in the
> > implementation.java extension modules for the testing.  I could not find
> > much success in getting around with a iTest too.  Here is what I wished
> to
> > do...
> >
> > - load the composite, read it up with
> > - resolve the composite and all of its constituents
> > - build the composite
> > - test if the composite's Java implementation component has correnctly
> > computed policies.
> >
> > Trying to do this the unit test way brings in cyclic dependencies and
> with
> > the iTest there seems to the trouble of 'almost' rewriting the
> > host-embeded
> > runtime.  So I just resorted to debugging for verification.  Any
> > suggestions
> > on how I could pull this off with a test case ?
> >
> > Should be embed event-listener-callback along the processing so that
> > interested listeners are called to take their actions after each phase
> > like
> > th read phase, resolve phase, build phase and so on.  Makes sense ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > - Venkat
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 15, 2007 9:20 PM, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for looking up :).  Yes, I don't think I have picked up
> policies
> > > specified for an implementation in the ComponentType.  I suppose the
> > > componenType will include the ones that have been specified using
> > > annotations.  I will give this a check.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > - Venkat
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 15, 2007 2:19 AM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Venkata Krishnan wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, I should have said 'resolution phase'.  Its all done in the
> > > > > CompositeProcessor.resolve method.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Looks good.
> > > >
> > > > Unless I missed it, I think you're missing code to add to the
> > component
> > > > policies the policies coming from a shared implementation, for
> example
> > > > policies specified as annotations in a Java implementation class.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Sebastien
> > > >
> > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to