Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 09:43 +0530, Deepal Jayasinghe wrote: > > >>Well , then let's go with the following approach; >> - To manage service session life cycle , there is no interface. If user >>want to need to get access to any context then he need to add those >>three method in to service impl class (init , setOperationConetxt , destroy) >> >> > >BTW even if we were going with interfaces we'd have to separate >setOperationContext because that's totally different from the service >context lifecyle. > > > >>- To mange service life cycle (which call at the deployment time , and >>when the system goes down), he MUST implement an interface and specified >>that in services.xml as follows >><service name="foo" class="interface impl class"> >> >> > >+1 from me. > >Can we agree to document them as: > >- if you want to monitor service context lifecycle then implement >init(ServiceContext)/destroy(ServiceContext) >- if you want to monitor operation context lifecycle then implement >setOperationContext(OperationContext) >- if you want to do something when the service is loaded and off loaded, >then implement the ServiceLifecycle interface and give that class to us > >I'm not thrilled with the method names we have but I'm fine with the >design. Anyone ideas for better names (from anyone)? > > I am fine with the name ( :) ) , so I will do the changes. Thanks Deepal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
