[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13054524#comment-13054524
]
Scott Kurz commented on TUSCANY-3884:
-------------------------------------
Simon,
You're talking about local as in colocated (single JVM), right? Not local as
in PBR, in contrast to remotable (PBV). Just clarifying since most times
I've seen the word "semantics" we're talking about PBR vs. PBV.
I'm not just nitpicking since there are some data-related semantics associated
with the current colocated code. By this I'm referring to the use of
Mediator.copyXXX rather than the use of the mediateXXX methods invoked by the
DataTransformationInterceptor. The copy results in a different object graph
than the DTI and also I believe does not use wrapper->wrapper transform whereas
the DTI typically does in our default Java/JAXB use case.
But I think you're mostly referring to delegating to the provider impl like we
do with the non-colocated (distributable) case?
> binding.sca local delegation
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-3884
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-3884
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-2.0-Beta2
> Reporter: Simon Laws
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Java-SCA-2.0
>
>
> Binding.sca currently delegates for remote semantics but implements local
> semantics in it's own provider. Should we create a separate local binding an
> delegate to that so it can we swapped out without affecting the provider
> functionality.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
