RE: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Redirecting callbacks

[Bryan Aupperle <aupperle@us.ibm.com>]

+1 and I thought we already nixed redirection
of callbacks in the Assembly TC at the F2F (The resolution of Assembly
issue 4).

Bryan Aupperle, Ph.D.
STSM, WebSphere Enterprise Platform Software Solution Architect
Master Inventor

Research Triangle Park,  NC 
+1 919-254-7508 (T/L 444-7508)
Internet Address: aupperle@us.ibm.com

"Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>

01/31/2008 09:27 AM

To	"Mike Edwards" <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>, "OASIS Java" <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	RE: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Redirecting callbacks

+1
 
Redirection of callbacks is another
of those edge cases that would make our specs appear overly complex. I
would be in favor of nixing it.
 
-- Sanjay

---

From: Mike Edwards [mailto:mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, Jan 31, 2008 0:10 AM
To: OASIS Java
Subject: Fw: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Redirecting callbacks


Copying to the list..... 

can we get the default "replyTo" field on these emails changed?

Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  
Email:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com 
----- Forwarded by Mike Edwards/UK/IBM on 31/01/2008 08:05 -----

Mike Edwards/UK/IBM

31/01/2008 08:04

To	"Michael Rowley" <mrowley@bea.com>
cc
Subject	Re: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Redirecting callbacksLink

Folks, 

Notwithstanding the discussion that has already taken place on this new
issue (& it would be nice to have a 
number to refer to !): 

Can I ask what is really intended here, please?  In other words, can
you outline the function that you are trying 
to allow (merely removing a sentence does not get at that).

I'd be more in favour of removing the capability of redirecting the callback
at all.  This is one of those pieces 
of complication that are in the 0.1%, not even the 20% case.  What
do we lose if we remove the capability 
altogether? 

Allowing an alternative callback raises all these nasty questions about
the nature of the replacement callback 
and its lifecycle, for which I know of no simple answers.  Forget
the implementers of runtimes for a moment, let's 
think about how you explain this capability to the end users.  What
expectations and obligations do those 
folks have if they utilise this capability? 


Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  
Email:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

"Michael Rowley" <mrowley@bea.com>

30/01/2008 20:13

To	"OASIS Java" <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Redirecting callbacks

RAISER: Michael Rowley 
  
TARGET: Java Common Annotations and APIs, section 6.7.5 Customizing the
callback 
  
DESCRIPTION: 
  
The last paragraph of this section says: 
  
A callback object may be a service reference to another service.  In
that case, the callback messages go directly to the service that has been
set as the callback.  If the callback object is not a service reference,
then callback messages go to the client and are then routed to the specific
instance that has been registered as the callback object.  However,
if the callback interface has a stateless scope, then the callback object
must be a service reference. 
  
The second sentence of this (saying that “... callback messages go directly...”)
is overly constraining has complex and confusing implications for runtimes.
  
PROPOSAL: 
  
Remove the second sentence from this paragraph.

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU