You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by "Simon Laws (JIRA)" <de...@tuscany.apache.org> on 2009/07/31 15:28:15 UTC

[jira] Created: (TUSCANY-3188) Is the Warning/Error raised correct when SCDL interface callback config doesn't match component type dervied from component

Is the Warning/Error raised correct when SCDL interface callback config doesn't match component type dervied from component
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: TUSCANY-3188
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3188
             Project: Tuscany
          Issue Type: Bug
    Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.0
         Environment: All
            Reporter: Simon Laws


Looking at ASM_8006 TestComposite61.composite (file is in General_Java)

   <component name="TestComposite61Component1">
               <implementation.java class="org.oasisopen.sca.test.service9Impl"/>
       <service name="Service9">
               <interface.java interface="org.oasisopen.sca.test.Service9"/>
       </service>
       <property name="serviceName" source="$serviceName"/>
   </component>

The SCDL service description only describes a forward interface but
the implementation describes a callback. We raise an error in this
case.

SEVERE: Component service interface incompatible with implementation
service interface: Component = TestComposite61Component1 Service =
Service9

Is that correct and we need to get the test fixed or should we just be
raising a warning in this case? It seems to me that if you are going
to go to the trouble of including an interface element in the SCDL
then it should match what the interface says (if this is true we need
to turn the Warning that is raised for references in this case into
Errors).


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

[jira] Commented: (TUSCANY-3188) Is the Warning/Error raised correct when SCDL interface callback config doesn't match component type dervied from component

Posted by "Simon Laws (JIRA)" <de...@tuscany.apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3188?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12737529#action_12737529 ] 

Simon Laws commented on TUSCANY-3188:
-------------------------------------

ASM80012 I think says that if a callback appears on a service or reference in the component type then if you specified an interface in the SCDL forthat service or reference it too must have a callback stated. 

This means that the otest needs fixing as ASM_8006 is testing that the callback interfaces are compatible not that they are both present. 

> Is the Warning/Error raised correct when SCDL interface callback config doesn't match component type dervied from component
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TUSCANY-3188
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3188
>             Project: Tuscany
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.0
>         Environment: All
>            Reporter: Simon Laws
>
> Looking at ASM_8006 TestComposite61.composite (file is in General_Java)
>    <component name="TestComposite61Component1">
>                <implementation.java class="org.oasisopen.sca.test.service9Impl"/>
>        <service name="Service9">
>                <interface.java interface="org.oasisopen.sca.test.Service9"/>
>        </service>
>        <property name="serviceName" source="$serviceName"/>
>    </component>
> The SCDL service description only describes a forward interface but
> the implementation describes a callback. We raise an error in this
> case.
> SEVERE: Component service interface incompatible with implementation
> service interface: Component = TestComposite61Component1 Service =
> Service9
> Is that correct and we need to get the test fixed or should we just be
> raising a warning in this case? It seems to me that if you are going
> to go to the trouble of including an interface element in the SCDL
> then it should match what the interface says (if this is true we need
> to turn the Warning that is raised for references in this case into
> Errors).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.