+1
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Sameera Jayasoma wrote:
> I believe this interface should be renamed to "*ServerStartupObserver*".
> Lets deprecate the interface "ServerStartupHandler". The interface name
> ServerStartupHandler does not sound correct to me.
>
> Since all the method names sh
I believe this interface should be renamed to "*ServerStartupObserver*".
Lets deprecate the interface "ServerStartupHandler". The interface name
ServerStartupHandler does not sound correct to me.
Since all the method names should start with a verb, I suggested following
method names for the new Se
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Anjana Fernando wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Afkham Azeez wrote:
>
>> Some handlers would need to be called after transports are started. So,
>> we could modify the interface to behave like the
>> Axis2ConfigurationContextObserver, and have pre & pos
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Afkham Azeez wrote:
> Some handlers would need to be called after transports are started. So, we
> could modify the interface to behave like the
> Axis2ConfigurationContextObserver, and have pre & post transport
> initialization methods.
>
+1, as I remember, ntas
Some handlers would need to be called after transports are started. So, we
could modify the interface to behave like the
Axis2ConfigurationContextObserver, and have pre & post transport
initialization methods.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>
> According to current St
According to current StartupFinalizerServiceComponent implementation, it
calls registered ServerStartupHandlers after starting transports but IMHO
it would be better to invoke ServerStartupHandlers before server start any
transports.
We have a requirement to perform few tasks just before server st
