You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org> on 2007/11/20 16:59:34 UTC
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's a
a callback?
Thanks.
slaws@apache.org wrote:
> Author: slaws
> Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> New Revision: 596692
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
> Log:
> TUSCANY-1914
> Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been added causing the number of services to be greater than 1
>
> Modified:
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>
> Modified: incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java (original)
> +++ incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> @@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
>
> String bindingURI;
> if (binding.getURI() == null) {
> - if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> + //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> + if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
> // Binding URI defaults to component URI / binding name
> bindingURI = String.valueOf(binding.getName());
> bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI() + '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Nov 23, 2007 11:27 PM, Simon Nash <na...@hursley.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Simon Laws wrote:
>
> > On Nov 20, 2007 6:47 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Simon Laws wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Nov 20, 2007 3:59 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
> >>>>understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's
> a
> >>>>a callback?
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>slaws@apache.org wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Author: slaws
> >>>>>Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> >>>>>New Revision: 596692
> >>>>>
> >>>>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
> >>>>>Log:
> >>>>>TUSCANY-1914
> >>>>>Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been
> >>
> >>added
> >>
> >>>>causing the number of services to be greater than 1
> >>>>
> >>>>>Modified:
> >>>>>
> >>>>
>
> >>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>>Modified:
> >>>>
>
> >>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>>URL:
> >>>>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
> >>
>
> >>==============================================================================
> >>
> >>>>>---
> >>>>
>
> >>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>(original)
> >>>>
> >>>>>+++
> >>>>
>
> >>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>
> >>>>Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> >>>>
> >>>>>@@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
> >>>>>
> >>>>> String bindingURI;
> >>>>> if (binding.getURI() == null) {
> >>>>>- if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> >>>>>+ //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> >>>>>+ if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
> >>>>> // Binding URI defaults to component URI
> >>
> >>/
> >>
> >>>>binding name
> >>>>
> >>>>> bindingURI = String.valueOf(
> >>
> >>binding.getName
> >>
> >>>>());
> >>>>
> >>>>> bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI
> >>
> >>()
> >>
> >>>>+ '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>Jean-Sebastien
> >>>>
> >>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here.
> >>>
> >>>When a callback is encountered on a component reference a new callback
> >>>service is now created to represent the endpoint of the callback
> >>>[createCallbackService(Component, ComponentReference) in the
> >>>CompositeConfigurationBuilder].
> >>>
> >>>I believe the intention is to treat these new services in the same way
> >>
> >>as
> >>
> >>>any other service that the component may be providing.
> >>
> >>There's a difference, they cannot be wired to using <reference
> >>target="...">.
> >>
> They can't be wired, but they can be looked up using createSelfReference()
> and getService(). This is necessary to allow them to be passed as
> service references on the setCallback() API.
>
> For wiring, createSelfReference(), and getService(), it is always
> possible to identify services by the fully qualified component/service
> name. In addition, if there is only one service on the component
> (counting both regular explicit services and implicit services for
> callbacks), it should be possible to specify the component name
> alone as a shorthand.
>
> So far so good. Now we get to the trickier case of how URIs are
> constructed for these services. For regular explicit services, the
> approach in the spec is inconsistent with how this works for wiring
> etc. as described above. The difference is that you either get a
> fully qualified component/service name or you get a shorthand
> component name only.
>
> The either/or/only part of the last sentence has very undesirable
> consequences in the following scenario:
> 1. A component has a single service A exposed via the shorthand URI.
> 2. Other bindings or non-SCA clients refer to it using the shorthand URI.
> 3. Another service B is added to the component. Now both A and B
> are exposed via fully qualified URIs.
> 4. Everyone who was referring to A by the shorthand URI is now broken.
>
> It's just as bad in the reverse scenario:
> 1. A component has a two services A and B exposed via fully qualified
> URIs.
> 2. Other bindings or non-SCA clients refer to A using a fully qualified
> URI.
> 3. Service B is removed from the component. Now A is only exposed via
> a shorthand URI.
> 4. Everyone who was referring to A by the fully qualified URI is now
> broken.
>
> The problem can be solved by always exposing services by the fully
> qualified
> URI. In the case where there's a single service on a component, it would
> be possible to also provide an "unsafe" alias shorthand URI that cannot be
> relied on for forward compatibility, but I can't see that it's worth
> adding
> this complexity for so little benefit.
>
> I have raised a spec issue for this.
>
> Simon
>
> >>I think it would be worth checking the intention with the spec group.
> >>
> >>Perhaps we should also check that the spec's intention is to continue to
> >>have this one service vs multiple services distinction. I can't seem to
> >>find it now on the mailing lists but I think I remember a discussion
> >>around that and people suggesting to remove that distinction.
> >>
> >>--
> >>Jean-Sebastien
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
> >>
> >>Yes - I remember that too. I'll raise a question with Mike Edwards or
> >
> > someone on the spec group and see if we can get some resolution to this.
> > Resolving the second question makes the first a moot point.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Simon
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
> Thanks for doing that Simon, I just saw the issue you raised on the OASIS
list.
I also don't see any real advantage to be had by specifying the unsafe
shorthands to identify component services.
Simon
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Posted by Simon Nash <na...@hursley.ibm.com>.
Simon Laws wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2007 6:47 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Simon Laws wrote:
>>
>>>On Nov 20, 2007 3:59 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
>>>>understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's a
>>>>a callback?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>slaws@apache.org wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Author: slaws
>>>>>Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
>>>>>New Revision: 596692
>>>>>
>>>>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
>>>>>Log:
>>>>>TUSCANY-1914
>>>>>Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been
>>
>>added
>>
>>>>causing the number of services to be greater than 1
>>>>
>>>>>Modified:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>
>>>>>Modified:
>>>>
>>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>
>>>>>URL:
>>>>
>>http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
>>
>>==============================================================================
>>
>>>>>---
>>>>
>>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>
>>>>(original)
>>>>
>>>>>+++
>>>>
>>incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>
>>>>Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
>>>>
>>>>>@@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
>>>>>
>>>>> String bindingURI;
>>>>> if (binding.getURI() == null) {
>>>>>- if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
>>>>>+ //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
>>>>>+ if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
>>>>> // Binding URI defaults to component URI
>>
>>/
>>
>>>>binding name
>>>>
>>>>> bindingURI = String.valueOf(
>>
>>binding.getName
>>
>>>>());
>>>>
>>>>> bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI
>>
>>()
>>
>>>>+ '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Jean-Sebastien
>>>>
>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here.
>>>
>>>When a callback is encountered on a component reference a new callback
>>>service is now created to represent the endpoint of the callback
>>>[createCallbackService(Component, ComponentReference) in the
>>>CompositeConfigurationBuilder].
>>>
>>>I believe the intention is to treat these new services in the same way
>>
>>as
>>
>>>any other service that the component may be providing.
>>
>>There's a difference, they cannot be wired to using <reference
>>target="...">.
>>
They can't be wired, but they can be looked up using createSelfReference()
and getService(). This is necessary to allow them to be passed as
service references on the setCallback() API.
For wiring, createSelfReference(), and getService(), it is always
possible to identify services by the fully qualified component/service
name. In addition, if there is only one service on the component
(counting both regular explicit services and implicit services for
callbacks), it should be possible to specify the component name
alone as a shorthand.
So far so good. Now we get to the trickier case of how URIs are
constructed for these services. For regular explicit services, the
approach in the spec is inconsistent with how this works for wiring
etc. as described above. The difference is that you either get a
fully qualified component/service name or you get a shorthand
component name only.
The either/or/only part of the last sentence has very undesirable
consequences in the following scenario:
1. A component has a single service A exposed via the shorthand URI.
2. Other bindings or non-SCA clients refer to it using the shorthand URI.
3. Another service B is added to the component. Now both A and B
are exposed via fully qualified URIs.
4. Everyone who was referring to A by the shorthand URI is now broken.
It's just as bad in the reverse scenario:
1. A component has a two services A and B exposed via fully qualified URIs.
2. Other bindings or non-SCA clients refer to A using a fully qualified URI.
3. Service B is removed from the component. Now A is only exposed via
a shorthand URI.
4. Everyone who was referring to A by the fully qualified URI is now broken.
The problem can be solved by always exposing services by the fully qualified
URI. In the case where there's a single service on a component, it would
be possible to also provide an "unsafe" alias shorthand URI that cannot be
relied on for forward compatibility, but I can't see that it's worth adding
this complexity for so little benefit.
I have raised a spec issue for this.
Simon
>>I think it would be worth checking the intention with the spec group.
>>
>>Perhaps we should also check that the spec's intention is to continue to
>>have this one service vs multiple services distinction. I can't seem to
>>find it now on the mailing lists but I think I remember a discussion
>>around that and people suggesting to remove that distinction.
>>
>>--
>>Jean-Sebastien
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>>
>>Yes - I remember that too. I'll raise a question with Mike Edwards or
>
> someone on the spec group and see if we can get some resolution to this.
> Resolving the second question makes the first a moot point.
>
> Regards
>
> Simon
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Nov 20, 2007 6:47 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Simon Laws wrote:
> > On Nov 20, 2007 3:59 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
> >> understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's a
> >> a callback?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >>
> >> slaws@apache.org wrote:
> >>> Author: slaws
> >>> Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> >>> New Revision: 596692
> >>>
> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
> >>> Log:
> >>> TUSCANY-1914
> >>> Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been
> added
> >> causing the number of services to be greater than 1
> >>> Modified:
> >>>
> >>
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>> Modified:
> >>
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >>> URL:
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
> >>
> ==============================================================================
> >>> ---
> >>
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >> (original)
> >>> +++
> >>
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >> Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> >>> @@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
> >>>
> >>> String bindingURI;
> >>> if (binding.getURI() == null) {
> >>> - if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> >>> + //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> >>> + if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
> >>> // Binding URI defaults to component URI
> /
> >> binding name
> >>> bindingURI = String.valueOf(
> binding.getName
> >> ());
> >>> bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI
> ()
> >> + '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Sebastien
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here.
> >
> > When a callback is encountered on a component reference a new callback
> > service is now created to represent the endpoint of the callback
> > [createCallbackService(Component, ComponentReference) in the
> > CompositeConfigurationBuilder].
> >
> > I believe the intention is to treat these new services in the same way
> as
> > any other service that the component may be providing.
>
> There's a difference, they cannot be wired to using <reference
> target="...">.
>
> I think it would be worth checking the intention with the spec group.
>
> Perhaps we should also check that the spec's intention is to continue to
> have this one service vs multiple services distinction. I can't seem to
> find it now on the mailing lists but I think I remember a discussion
> around that and people suggesting to remove that distinction.
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
> Yes - I remember that too. I'll raise a question with Mike Edwards or
someone on the spec group and see if we can get some resolution to this.
Resolving the second question makes the first a moot point.
Regards
Simon
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Posted by Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>.
Simon Laws wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2007 3:59 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
>> understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's a
>> a callback?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> slaws@apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: slaws
>>> Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
>>> New Revision: 596692
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> TUSCANY-1914
>>> Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been added
>> causing the number of services to be greater than 1
>>> Modified:
>>>
>> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>> Modified:
>> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>>> ---
>> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>> (original)
>>> +++
>> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
>> Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
>>> @@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
>>>
>>> String bindingURI;
>>> if (binding.getURI() == null) {
>>> - if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
>>> + //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
>>> + if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
>>> // Binding URI defaults to component URI /
>> binding name
>>> bindingURI = String.valueOf(binding.getName
>> ());
>>> bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI()
>> + '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Sebastien
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>>
>> Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here.
>
> When a callback is encountered on a component reference a new callback
> service is now created to represent the endpoint of the callback
> [createCallbackService(Component, ComponentReference) in the
> CompositeConfigurationBuilder].
>
> I believe the intention is to treat these new services in the same way as
> any other service that the component may be providing.
There's a difference, they cannot be wired to using <reference
target="...">.
I think it would be worth checking the intention with the spec group.
Perhaps we should also check that the spec's intention is to continue to
have this one service vs multiple services distinction. I can't seem to
find it now on the mailing lists but I think I remember a discussion
around that and people suggesting to remove that distinction.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r596692 - /incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Nov 20, 2007 3:59 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <js...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Are you sure that this is the right semantics? Can you help me
> understand why we need to change the naming of the service if there's a
> a callback?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> slaws@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: slaws
> > Date: Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> > New Revision: 596692
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=596692&view=rev
> > Log:
> > TUSCANY-1914
> > Construct URLs as ComponentName/ServiceName if callbacks have been added
> causing the number of services to be greater than 1
> >
> > Modified:
> >
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> >
> > Modified:
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> > URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java?rev=596692&r1=596691&r2=596692&view=diff
> >
> ==============================================================================
> > ---
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> (original)
> > +++
> incubator/tuscany/java/sca/modules/assembly/src/main/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/assembly/builder/impl/CompositeConfigurationBuilderImpl.java
> Tue Nov 20 06:35:45 2007
> > @@ -280,7 +280,8 @@
> >
> > String bindingURI;
> > if (binding.getURI() == null) {
> > - if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> > + //if (componentServices.size() > 1) {
> > + if (component.getServices().size() > 1) {
> > // Binding URI defaults to component URI /
> binding name
> > bindingURI = String.valueOf(binding.getName
> ());
> > bindingURI = URI.create(component.getURI()
> + '/').resolve(bindingURI).toString();
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
> >
>
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-commits-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-commits-help@ws.apache.org
>
> Maybe I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here.
When a callback is encountered on a component reference a new callback
service is now created to represent the endpoint of the callback
[createCallbackService(Component, ComponentReference) in the
CompositeConfigurationBuilder].
I believe the intention is to treat these new services in the same way as
any other service that the component may be providing. The URL of these
services must then follow the same rules as the other services that the
component exposes. In particular if the component has more than one service
then more fidelity is required in each service URL in order to differentiate
between them.
The change here is intended to include the newly created callback services
when considering how many services a component has.
Regards
Simon