I went to the project level and did a Team -> Update. Then, I go to the project level and I do a Team -> Create Patch, but it only recognizes my new classes. This is getting on my nerves, because I have both of these issues resolved with test cases and I would like to check it into the 1.1 codebase for you folks to check out.
-----Original Message----- From: Knut Wannheden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 11:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: AOPAlliance Service Interceptors... Sounds strange... Only tips I have: - Try resynchronizing the entire project - Create the patch on the Project level Sorry if this doesn't help, but I can't think of anything else... --knut On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:47:11 -0500, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I've got it implemented with test cases, but I can't get Eclipse to > generate a patch for me! It sees my new classes, but fails to include the > changes I have made to existing classes/interfaces. HELP! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 10:47 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: AOPAlliance Service Interceptors... > > This works for me. Having the name default to the service id is a > perfectly fine idea. > > On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 08:35:50 -0500, James Carman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Has anyone else come up with a way to do this cleanly? I think one big > step > > in the right direction would be support for overriding the interceptor's > > name, replacing the factory's id with something else. This way, we could > > define ONE service interceptor factory which inserts a MethodInterceptor > > defined elsewhere in the registry (or inline maybe) and the interceptors > > could still be ordered, since they could have unique names. We could > leave > > it backward compatible, of course, defaulting the interceptor name to the > > service id of the interceptor factory. > > > > > > > > <interceptor service-id="hivemind.lib.MethodInterceptorFactory" > > name="security"> > > > > <impl object="service:mymodule.SecurityInterceptor"; /> > > > > </interceptor> > > > > > > > > <interceptor service-id="hivemind.lib.MethodInterceptorFactory" > > name="logging" before="security"> > > > > <impl > object="instance:com.myco.myproject.interceptor.LoggingInterceptor" > > /> > > > > </interceptor> > > > > > > > > Here, we have defined a service interceptor using another service and one > > using just a plain ole object. What do you guys think? > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Carman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:35 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: AOPAlliance Service Interceptors... > > > > > > > > > > --> > > > > > > Hello, All. Since the AOPAlliance Service Interceptors support didn't > make > > it into 1.1, when can we expect that to become available? I would like to > > discuss service interceptors in my article, but there is NO WAY that I'm > > going to try to explain how to do it using Javassist. I would like to use > > the AOPAlliance stuff. > > > > > > > > James > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
