Why StAXArtifactProcessor inside policy-xml was commented

[shaoguang geng <ge...@yahoo.com>]

Hi, every one,

Meta file:

META-INF/services/org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.StAXArtifactProcessor
was commented.

Thus any xml mark like intent will not get processed?

Could you please give me some clue?

Thanks.



       
---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! 
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.

Re: Why StAXArtifactProcessor inside policy-xml was commented

[Venkata Krishnan <fo...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I am in the process of enabling the definitions and policy processors for
lazy initialization by specifying them in the META-INF/services.  Right now
these processors need and instance of the ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor to
deal with various extensions such as policy attachments within policysets
and so on.  I am yet to figure out a way to get this passed as part of the
lazy initialization.  Hence I have commented this out for now.

Now, its just that the lazy initialization of processors is not yet in, I
still have the SCADocumentProcessor instantiating all of these processors as
it is the one that will need these processors to process the elements of a
definitions.xml file.  So the definitions.xml will continue to get read up
as before.

- Venkat

On 9/26/07, shaoguang geng <ge...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, every one,
>
> Meta file:
>
>
> META-INF/services/org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.StAXArtifactProcessor
> was commented.
>
> Thus any xml mark like intent will not get processed?
>
> Could you please give me some clue?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo!
> Games.