Sounds to me like your Task services are configurable, and you should consider using Configuration Admin to provide them with their configuration. The services themselves can then propagate the configuration (or the relevant parts of it) as service properties. You can still convert your annotations to configuration, feed that to Configuration Admin and have it picked up.
Greetings, Marcel On Apr 10, 2012, at 19:26 PM, Quecas wrote: > > Thanks for the input guys. > > I have given this use case some thought, and yes there are a few ways of > accomplishing what's needed - annotations just seem like a natural fit... > > Suppose there's an interface called Task which defines one method - void > execute(Context ctx). > > Task implementations may come and go and there may be many different types > of Tasks. > > An executing task can query ctx for specific inbound parameters which were > defined AND HERE IT COMES... by annotations. These annotations would have > been picked by for example, some GUI TOOL where a user would have defined > values for specific parameters belonging to a specific TaskImpl > > I could also add List<Parameter> getTaskParameters() to the Task interface > making it part of the API, but annotations feel like a natural fit here - > what you guys think? > > Is it correct then to say that the bottom line with respect to OSGI and > making these annotations available in this use case, would require the > implementers of Task to make the pkgs public? An import package would > probably also be required somewhere else. > > Thanks, > Jorge > > > > > Richard S. Hall wrote: >> >> On 4/10/12 11:15 , Quecas wrote: >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> One of the big paradigms of OSGI is to define a public API/SPI as an >>> interface while keeping the implementation(s) private. Having said that >>> and >>> if the various implementations of a specific service each define >>> meta-data >>> using annotations, how would one get to this information without shifting >>> from the paradigm or "bending" the rules. >> >> Are you talking about service properties, for example? For those types >> of things you need to limit yourself to only using standard properties. >> If you need stuff that is in non-standard properties, then you are going >> to be bound to implementations. >> >> -> richard >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jorge >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Annotation-Decorated-Service-tp33662168p33663049.html > Sent from the Apache Felix - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
