-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [DS] Feedback wanted on some ideas From: David Jencks <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Wed 03 Oct 2012 12:28:49 PM CDT > 4. (radical idea I haven't tried yet) I'm becoming increasingly convinced > that the state objects in AbstractComponentManager mostly cause confusion and > make the code more complicated and less reliable. The spec really only > describes two states, enabled and disabled. The variations on enabled -- > whether the component has all its dependencies satisfied, whether the service > is registered, whether there are any implementation objects created -- all > seem somewhat orthogonal and depend very much on the environment and don't > seem to relate well to a single "dimension" of state. I'm considering trying > to refactor the code that responds to outside actions (activate/deactivate > and dependencies appearing/disappearing) to be more "straight-through" with > checks on the specific aspects of state that they need. Possibly we would > want to put the "dynamic state" such as dependencies + instances in a single > state object, but this is a different approach to the current state objects > which have no internal state. > yes, as a dumb user :-) I have hard time understanding both old and new state transitions. would it be possible to produce proposed scr state diagram in a form similar to this:
http://devangelist.blogspot.com/2011/04/osgi-bundle-lifecycles.html
