You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> on 2006/06/08 01:48:55 UTC
[PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Hi, Jeremy.
Attached is a patch for the SDO DataBinding code in your sandbox. It ports the code to the new SPIs in the sandbox. Please review and apply.
There're several TODOs in the code. We need to understand how to get the corresponding SDO TypeHelper for a given DeploymentContext.
Thanks,
Raymond
Re: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, I was supposed to create two patches, one for the update and the
other one for the new feature.
Here're the splitted patches.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jb...@apache.org>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO
DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
> Thanks Raymond - I'll work on applying this.
>
> I think you've identified a key issue here - how does a databinding's
> type system mapping work in the new recursive model?
>
> In the 0.9 view, modules were flat so it was easy to make the
> association between a module and a TypeHelper. Recursion opens up new
> questions such as:
> * should there be a heirarchy of types to match the hierarchy
> of composites?
> * what are the sharing rules for types? Are all types shared between
> a parent composite and its children? Are none?
> * if a type is defined in multiple places in a hierarchy,
> which one is used?
>
> Any thoughts on how we would like this to work?
> --
> Jeremy
>
> Raymond Feng wrote:
>> Hi, Jeremy.
>>
>> Attached is a patch for the SDO DataBinding code in your sandbox. It
>> ports the code to the new SPIs in the sandbox. Please review and
>> apply.
>>
>> There're several TODOs in the code. We need to understand how to get
>> the corresponding SDO TypeHelper for a given DeploymentContext.
>>
>> Thanks, Raymond
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
Re: Type definitions in composites
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
It's on the user mailing list:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-user/200606.mbox/date
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jb...@apache.org>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: Type definitions in composites
> Raymond Feng wrote:
>> BTW, we already started a thread on scoping for SDO types.
>>
>
> Could you post a link - I couldn't find it?
> Thanks
> --
> Jeremy
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Type definitions in composites
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
Raymond Feng wrote:
> BTW, we already started a thread on scoping for SDO types.
>
Could you post a link - I couldn't find it?
Thanks
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
It's a challenge but it also opens a good opportunity for us the figure out
how to align the SCA composition hierarchy with the databinding model
scopes.
I think there will be two perspectives on both the Tuscany and the
databinding sides.
1) How does the databinding framework support the pluggable scoping for its
typing system (if it can)?
2) What're the isolation/sharing/visibility rules for the databinding types
in the context of the composite hierarchy?
BTW, we already started a thread on scoping for SDO types.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jb...@apache.org>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO
DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
> Thanks Raymond - I'll work on applying this.
>
> I think you've identified a key issue here - how does a databinding's
> type system mapping work in the new recursive model?
>
> In the 0.9 view, modules were flat so it was easy to make the
> association between a module and a TypeHelper. Recursion opens up new
> questions such as:
> * should there be a heirarchy of types to match the hierarchy
> of composites?
> * what are the sharing rules for types? Are all types shared between
> a parent composite and its children? Are none?
> * if a type is defined in multiple places in a hierarchy,
> which one is used?
>
> Any thoughts on how we would like this to work?
> --
> Jeremy
>
> Raymond Feng wrote:
>> Hi, Jeremy.
>>
>> Attached is a patch for the SDO DataBinding code in your sandbox. It
>> ports the code to the new SPIs in the sandbox. Please review and
>> apply.
>>
>> There're several TODOs in the code. We need to understand how to get
>> the corresponding SDO TypeHelper for a given DeploymentContext.
>>
>> Thanks, Raymond
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
On 6/30/06, Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I'm having problems applying this. I will merge the changes in by hand
> - please bear with me.
It's now applied.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
On 6/8/06, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Jeremy.
>
> Here's the patch with correct SVN property settings. Please try again.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
I'm having problems applying this. I will merge the changes in by hand
- please bear with me.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Jeremy.
Here's the patch with correct SVN property settings. Please try again.
Thanks,
Raymond
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jb...@apache.org>
To: <tu...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO
DataBinding to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
> Thanks Raymond - I'll work on applying this.
>
> I think you've identified a key issue here - how does a databinding's
> type system mapping work in the new recursive model?
>
> In the 0.9 view, modules were flat so it was easy to make the
> association between a module and a TypeHelper. Recursion opens up new
> questions such as:
> * should there be a heirarchy of types to match the hierarchy
> of composites?
> * what are the sharing rules for types? Are all types shared between
> a parent composite and its children? Are none?
> * if a type is defined in multiple places in a hierarchy,
> which one is used?
>
> Any thoughts on how we would like this to work?
> --
> Jeremy
>
> Raymond Feng wrote:
>> Hi, Jeremy.
>>
>> Attached is a patch for the SDO DataBinding code in your sandbox. It
>> ports the code to the new SPIs in the sandbox. Please review and
>> apply.
>>
>> There're several TODOs in the code. We need to understand how to get
>> the corresponding SDO TypeHelper for a given DeploymentContext.
>>
>> Thanks, Raymond
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org
>
Type definitions in composites, was: [PATCH] Porting SDO DataBinding
to the new SPI in Jeremy's sandbox
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <jb...@apache.org>.
Thanks Raymond - I'll work on applying this.
I think you've identified a key issue here - how does a databinding's
type system mapping work in the new recursive model?
In the 0.9 view, modules were flat so it was easy to make the
association between a module and a TypeHelper. Recursion opens up new
questions such as:
* should there be a heirarchy of types to match the hierarchy
of composites?
* what are the sharing rules for types? Are all types shared between
a parent composite and its children? Are none?
* if a type is defined in multiple places in a hierarchy,
which one is used?
Any thoughts on how we would like this to work?
--
Jeremy
Raymond Feng wrote:
> Hi, Jeremy.
>
> Attached is a patch for the SDO DataBinding code in your sandbox. It
> ports the code to the new SPIs in the sandbox. Please review and
> apply.
>
> There're several TODOs in the code. We need to understand how to get
> the corresponding SDO TypeHelper for a given DeploymentContext.
>
> Thanks, Raymond
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-help@ws.apache.org