[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Java CI should have corresponding changesin JAVA-125 - [JAVA-153]
David Booz wrote: > This calls into question the resolution of issue 125. It doesn't seem > possible for a CI to support the use of @remotable on interface.java > unless the CI support componentType side files and the specification of > @remotable appears in a componentType. > > Either that or we have to change the assembly rules and allow a > component interface declaration to assert the remotable aspect onto a > componentType, which doesn't seem desirable. > > For JCI, we could decide that interface.java/@remotable is just not > supported but leave it there in the JCAA for other Java based CIs to > use. Graham may have had some other use cases in mind which we should > not arbitrarily remove. > We should leave it there. It could be used in a contrainingType. Simon > > Dave Booz > STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture > Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC > "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" > Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 > e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com > > Inactive hide details for Simon Nash ---04/21/2009 06:22:59 AM---Mike, > The paragraph in question (in section 2.3) says which seSimon Nash > ---04/21/2009 06:22:59 AM---Mike, The paragraph in question (in section > 2.3) says which services are > > > From: > Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> > > To: > sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org > > Date: > 04/21/2009 06:22 AM > > Subject: > Re: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Java CI should have corresponding changes in > JAVA-125 - [JAVA-153] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Mike, > The paragraph in question (in section 2.3) says which services are > selected by the component type introspection algorithm in the absence > of @Service annotations. This paragraph currently says that only > those interfaces with a @Remotable annotation would be selected. > The proposed change attempts to broaden this, and from your comments > here I believe you are agreeing that this broadening would not > be possible. > > Regarding your second point of using <interface.java> in a component > definition to affect the remotable state of the interface, we realised > on yesterday's call that this doesn't work because it violates the > compatibility relationship between component type and component. > If the introspected component type detects a service interface as > being local because it isn't annotated with @Remotable, the component > definition cannot specify a remotable interface because this would > violate the definition of compatibility in the Assembly spec. > > I think the only way round this would be to re-introduce a > .componentType side file for Java implementations so that the > component type's service interface could be marked as remotable > using the @remotable attribute on <interface.java>. > > Simon > > Mike Edwards wrote: > > > > Simon, > > > > I don't read the new sections in the way that you do and I don't see a > > problem. > > > > I agree that if a Java POJO implements an interface that is not marked > > remotable and > > does not mark that interface as being a Service, then it will not appear > > in the component > > type of the POJO as a service and so cannot be used as such - making the > > question > > of marking it remotable with <interface,java/> moot. > > > > However, Mark's suggested sections don't contradict this. The section > > on calculation > > of component type remains unchanged. Only once the service appears in > > the component > > type can the use of the attribute on <interface.java/> affect the > > remotable state of the > > interface.... > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > From: Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> > > To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org > > Date: 20/04/2009 15:30 > > Subject: Re: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Java CI should have corresponding > > changes in JAVA-125 - [JAVA-153] > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Mike, > > My concern is not about local services but about remotable services. > > > > In the absence of @Service, the introspection algorithm identifies > > interfaces implemented by the implementation class as being > > SCA services if they carry a @Remotable annotation. The proposed > > change would extend this to include the case where the interface > > doesn't carry a @Remotable annotation, but the <interface.java> > > element in a component configuration carries a @remotable attribute. > > > > This can't work because the introspection algorithm for discovering > > which services should be included in the componentType only has > > access to the Java interfaces and not to any component configurations > > that may configure these Java interfaces as being remotable SCA > > services. In order to do this, the @Service annotation would need > > to be used. > > > > Simon > > > > Mike Edwards wrote: > > > > > > Simon, > > > > > > I don't follow your point below. > > > > > > Mark's text seems to work just fine. So you can't introspect a local > > > interface as a Service if it is not > > > used by a @Service annotation. I agree - but that does not contradict > > > the statements made in Mark's > > > formulation. > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > From: Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com> > > > To: sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org > > > Date: 20/04/2009 13:26 > > > Subject: Re: [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Java CI should have > > corresponding > > > changes in JAVA-125 - [JAVA-153] > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Combellack wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raised as new issue 153. See > http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-153 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark Combellack| Software Developer| Avaya | Eastern Business Park > > | St. > > > > Mellons | Cardiff | CF3 5EA | Voice: +44 (0) 29 2081 7624 | > > > > mcombellack@avaya.com <mailto:|mcombellack@avaya.com> > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > *From:* David Booz [mailto:booz@us.ibm.com] > > > > *Sent:* 26 March 2009 13:11 > > > > *To:* sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > *Subject:* [sca-j] NEW ISSUE: Java CI should have corresponding > > changes > > > > in JAVA-125 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TARGET: Java C&I WD05 [1] > > > > > > > > DESCRIPTION: > > > > Issue 125 [2] should have had corresponding changes in Java C&I > spec, > > > > see Section 2.2. > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL: > > > > Section 2.2 line 144-146, change to: > > > > A Java service contract defined by an interface or implementation > > class > > > > uses the @Remotable annotation or @remotable on > <interface.java/> to > > > > declare that the service follows the semantics of remotable > > services as > > > > defined by the SCA Assembly Specification, otherwise it is > inferred to > > > > be a local service. > > > > > > > > Delete Line 156-158. > > > > > > > > Line 164-169, change to: > > > > If the interfaces of the SCA services are not specified with the > > > > @Service annotation on the implementation class, it is assumed > > that all > > > > implemented interfaces that are remotable, as defined in > > [JAVACAA], are > > > > the service interfaces provided by the component. If an > implementation > > > > class has only implemented interfaces that are not remotable, the > > class > > > > is considered to implement a single */local/* service whose type is > > > > defined by the class (note that local services can be typed using > > either > > > > Java interfaces or classes). > > > > > > > This doesn't work because the list of available services is part of > > > the componentType and is determined by introspection. If one of the > > > interfaces implemented doesn't use @Remotable but is configured in > > > the component definition using the @remotable attribute, it can't be > > > introspected as a service interface for the componentType. > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/31836/sca-javaci-1.1-spec-wd05.pdf > > > > [2] http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-125 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dave Booz > > > > STSM, BPM and SCA Architecture > > > > Co-Chair OASIS SCA-Policy TC and SCA-J TC > > > > "Distributed objects first, then world hunger" > > > > Poughkeepsie, NY (845)-435-6093 or 8-295-6093 > > > > e-mail:booz@us.ibm.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > / > > > / > > > > > > /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/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > / > > / > > > > /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/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]