RE: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no lifecycle defined for SCA Components - Updated proposal revision 3

["Mark Combellack" <mcombellack@avaya.com>]

Hi,

 

Following on from Simons comments in [1], I have updated the proposal by using Simon’s proposed wording changes. This new version is attached as version 3.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

 

[1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200903/msg00061.html

Mark Combellack| Software Developer| Avaya | Eastern Business Park | St. Mellons | Cardiff | CF3 5EA | Voice: +44 (0) 29 2081 7624 | mcombellack@avaya.com

---

From: Mark Combellack [mailto:mcombellack@avaya.com]
Sent: 12 March 2009 13:51
To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no lifecycle defined for SCA Components - Updated proposal revision 2

 

Hi,

 

As discussed in our conference calls, I have updated the proposal for JAVA-65 to remove the PostInit and PreDestroy phases to simplify the model. The attached document contains the revised proposal

 

All changes for Issue 65 are contained in a new chapter 4.

 

The changes between this new revision 2 and the original proposal are:

 

• Removed the @PostInit annotation and associated state in the lifecycle model
• Removed the @PreDestroy annotation and associated state in the lifecycle model

 

This update completes my action 2009-02-19-02.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

Mark Combellack| Software Developer| Avaya | Eastern Business Park | St. Mellons | Cardiff | CF3 5EA | Voice: +44 (0) 29 2081 7624 | mcombellack@avaya.com

 

sca-javacaa-1.1-spec-cd02-rev2_plus_Issue 65-rev3.doc