[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no lifecycle defined for SCA Components- Updated proposal revision 5
Just one comment on this. In the Destroying state, there are words saying that if a component implementation invokes an operation on an injected reference that refers to a target that has been destroyed, the SCA Runtime MUST throw a ServiceUnavailableException. I believe the correct exception is InvalidServiceException. Unlike the corresponding case in the Initializing state, this reference will never become valid at some point in the future. Simon Mark Combellack wrote: > Hi Vamsi, > > Thanks for your review comments. I have incorporated them into revision 5 of the proposal for Issue 65 that is attached to this email. > > I have highlighted in yellow the changes in the proposal from revision 3 (which we discussed on the call yesterday) > > Thanks, > > Mark > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: C Vamsi [mailto:vamsic007@in.ibm.com] >> Sent: 17 March 2009 04:26 >> To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no lifecycle defined for SCA >> Components - Updated proposal revision 4 >> >> Some comments on the proposal... >> >> Line 210: *an* SCA >> >> Line 212: *an* SCA >> >> Line 214-215: "... an instance of the component implementation object ..." >> or "... an instance of the component implementation class ..."? >> >> Line 219: To make it consistent across the doc, change "business requests" >> to "service requests". >> >> Line 228: "In this case" instead of "In which case". >> >> Line 234: constructor. c in lowercase >> >> Line 236: constructor. c in lowercase >> >> Line 256: "component implementations" instead of "Component >> Implmentations". c and i in lowercase. >> >> Line 257-259: Change "The SCA Runtime MUST throw a >> ServiceUnavailableException if a component implementation invokes an >> operation on an injected reference that refers to a target that has not >> yet >> been initialized." >> >> to >> >> "If a component implementation invokes an operation on an injected >> reference that refers to a target that has not yet been initialized, the >> SCA Runtime MUST throw a ServiceUnavailableException." >> >> Line 272: "component implementations" instead of "Component >> Implmentations". c and i in lowercase. >> >> Line 273-275: Change "The SCA Runtime MUST throw a >> ServiceUnavailableException if a component implementation invokes an >> operation on an injected reference that refers to a target that has been >> destroyed." >> >> to >> >> "If a component implementation invokes an operation on an injected >> reference that refers to a target that has been destroyed, the SCA Runtime >> MUST throw a ServiceUnavailableException." >> >> ++Vamsi >> Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org >> Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org >> >> >> >> "Mark Combellack" >> <mcombellack@avay >> a.com> To >> <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org> >> 17/03/2009 03:44 cc >> >> Subject >> RE: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no >> lifecycle defined for SCA >> Components - Updated proposal >> revision 4 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Based on the comments in the conference call, I have produced version 4 of >> the specification. >> >> >> >> To simplify identifying the changes, I have highlighted them in yellow. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Mark >> >> Mark Combellack| Software Developer| Avaya | EasternBusinessPark| St. >> Mellons | Cardiff| CF3 5EA | Voice: +44 (0) 29 2081 7624 | >> mcombellack@avaya.com >> >> >> >> From:Mark Combellack [mailto:mcombellack@avaya.com] >> Sent: 15 March 2009 21:28 >> To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [sca-j] [ISSUE 65] There is no lifecycle defined for SCA >> Components - Updated proposal revision 3 >> >> >> >> 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 | EasternBusinessPark| 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 | EasternBusinessPark| St. >> Mellons | Cardiff| CF3 5EA | Voice: +44 (0) 29 2081 7624 | >> mcombellack@avaya.com >> >> (See attached file: sca-javacaa-1.1-spec-cd02-rev2_plus_Issue 65- >> rev4.doc) >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]