+1 LieGrue, strub
----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:39 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] features related to the jsf lifecycle > > if there are no objections, i'll import the annotations tomorrow. > -> we can change the names later on (as soon as we have an agreement). > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2012/10/17 Jason Porter <[email protected]> > >> I honestly don't have a preference for the names. >> >> +1 for @BeforePhase / @AfterPhase >> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Brian Leathem <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > On Wed 17 Oct 2012 11:17:46 AM PDT, Brian Leathem wrote: >> > >> >> can we not build on the @ListenerFor annotation in JSF [1]? >> >> >> >> @ListenerFor(phaseEventClass=.**..) >> >> >> >> or, if we need a unique name, perhaps: >> >> >> >> @ListenerForPhase(**phaseEventClass=...) >> >> >> > >> > As Gerhard pointed out in IRC, this would just be a marker annotation, >> and >> > hence empty: >> > @ListenerForPhase() >> > >> > Brian >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Jason Porter >> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com >> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp >> >> Software Engineer >> Open Source Advocate >> >> PGP key id: 926CCFF5 >> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu >> >
