James Strachan wrote:
...snip
We should bring it up with the spec group.
Just out of interest; is the spec group a private separate mail list?
It might be worth using a tuscany mail list for public discussions of
the spec. I guess we could just reuse the dev list and use a [spe
James,
Here is my view of the questions you have with regard to the SCA spec:
James Strachan wrote:
BTW I really like the SCA specification, though coming from a POJO /
Spring background the distinction between @Reference and @Property
seems a little surprising at first - I just wanted to de
On 13 Dec 2005, at 19:28, Jim Marino wrote:
So I also looked at
http://www.jroller.com/page/habuma/20051206
Yes I think burning component names in annotations is bad. Also,
likewise for specifying property values since Java has an
assignment operator for that ;-).
Agreed
I also had a l
So I also looked at
http://www.jroller.com/page/habuma/20051206
Yes I think burning component names in annotations is bad. Also,
likewise for specifying property values since Java has an assignment
operator for that ;-).
I also had a look at:
http://jroller.com/page/habuma?entry=spring_2
This is a good discussion, and it's getting long.
I added comments inline...and snipped some text to
narrow the discussion. I hope this helps.
On 12/13/05, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 13 Dec 2005, at 16:46, Jim Marino wrote:
> > Thanks for the feedback James! Some comments in
On Dec 13, 2005, at 9:58 AM, James Strachan wrote:
On 13 Dec 2005, at 16:46, Jim Marino wrote:
Thanks for the feedback James! Some comments inline...
On Dec 13, 2005, at 6:53 AM, James Strachan wrote:
BTW I really like the SCA specification, though coming from a
POJO / Spring background
On 13 Dec 2005, at 16:46, Jim Marino wrote:
Thanks for the feedback James! Some comments inline...
On Dec 13, 2005, at 6:53 AM, James Strachan wrote:
BTW I really like the SCA specification, though coming from a
POJO / Spring background the distinction between @Reference and
@Property seems
I just thought about something else - we may be able to infer
@Reference semantics if a reference is decorated with a policy or
QoS. For example, if I have the following:
@SomePolicy
Foo fooReference
The runtime should be smart enough to infer that 'fooReference' can
only be a "reference"
Thanks for the feedback James! Some comments inline...
On Dec 13, 2005, at 6:53 AM, James Strachan wrote:
BTW I really like the SCA specification, though coming from a
POJO / Spring background the distinction between @Reference and
@Property seems a little surprising at first - I just wanted
BTW I really like the SCA specification, though coming from a POJO /
Spring background the distinction between @Reference and @Property
seems a little surprising at first - I just wanted to describe my
initial confusion and see if I'm on the right track to their intended
differences and how
10 matches
Mail list logo
