You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> on 2006/07/24 07:05:26 UTC
Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
What do you think about converting all interceptors to be compliant
with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on their site:
http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
-dain
Re: Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jul 23, 2006, at 11:43 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On 7/24/06, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>> What do you think about converting all interceptors to be compliant
>> with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on their site:
>>
>> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
>
> Isn't it part of JEE spec that OpenEJB 3 needs to be converted to?
Yes, but we can choose to adopt or not adopt the spec interceptor
interface for our interceptors.
-dain
Re: Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On 7/24/06, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> What do you think about converting all interceptors to be compliant
> with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on their site:
>
> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
Isn't it part of JEE spec that OpenEJB 3 needs to be converted to?
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl
Re: Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Jul 24, 2006, at 9:53 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Jul 23, 2006, at 11:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>> What do you think about converting all interceptors to be
>>> compliant with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on
>>> their site:
>>>
>>> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
>>
>> Sounds neat. How would our current container interceptors
>> dovetail w/ interceptors that application developers create?
>
> To start with there is currently no way for a user to do "dovetail"
> in their interceptors at all. I do have a few ideas on how to
> allow users to setup interceptors. I think in general we should
> allow users to add interceptors to the head and tail of our
> container chain (the chain that handles stuff like security and
> transaction). To do this, the user should be able to set
> interceptors a the class and package level as required by the
> spec. Then we should allow our users to specify them at the ejb
> module, container and global levels.
>
> Anyway, to keep things simple during the transition, I think we
> should simply create our own interface with the following method:
>
> Object invoke(InvocationContext invocationContext) throws Exception;
>
> The big difference between this and the current interceptor
> interface we are using from Geronimo is that it has a
> InvocationResult return type and allows for a Throwable.
>
Been burning to do that ever since we (the EJB3 EG) changed
javax.ejb.InvocationContext to javax.interceptor.InvocationContext to
better align with the web services handler concept. Definitely the
main reason I split out the Geronimo interceptor concept into it's
own module.
I say go for it.
-David
Re: Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jul 23, 2006, at 11:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>> What do you think about converting all interceptors to be
>> compliant with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on
>> their site:
>>
>> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
>
> Sounds neat. How would our current container interceptors dovetail
> w/ interceptors that application developers create?
To start with there is currently no way for a user to do "dovetail"
in their interceptors at all. I do have a few ideas on how to allow
users to setup interceptors. I think in general we should allow
users to add interceptors to the head and tail of our container chain
(the chain that handles stuff like security and transaction). To do
this, the user should be able to set interceptors a the class and
package level as required by the spec. Then we should allow our
users to specify them at the ejb module, container and global levels.
Anyway, to keep things simple during the transition, I think we
should simply create our own interface with the following method:
Object invoke(InvocationContext invocationContext) throws Exception;
The big difference between this and the current interceptor interface
we are using from Geronimo is that it has a InvocationResult return
type and allows for a Throwable.
-dain
Re: Adopt javax.interceptor for all interceptors
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> What do you think about converting all interceptors to be compliant
> with javax.interceptor? BEA has some good examples on their site:
>
> http://edocs.bea.com/wls/docs92/ejb30/examples.html#wp1200599
Sounds neat. How would our current container interceptors dovetail w/
interceptors that application developers create?
Regards,
Alan