Raymond Feng wrote:
Isn't option [3] on the vote the same as your [n]?
[3] Define an "InvokerProperties" interface to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", change the
Provider.createInvoker() to take InvokerProperties. Add
"getInvokerProperties()" to the Invoker interface.
[n] Define an "InvokerProperties" interface to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", add an "InvokerProperties"
parameter to the createInvoker() method, and add
"getInvokerProperties()" to the Invoker interface.
My apologies. I overlooked this one (not sure how, but it could
be related to its position in the middle of the list). Yes, this
option is the same as my proposal.
My vote is [3], [2].
Simon
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Simon Nash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 2:34 PM
To: <tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Pass-by-value related SPI change
Raymond Feng wrote:
Hi,
Please vote on one of the following five options to define
allowsPassByReference property for Invokers. You can vote with
multiple choices ordered by your preference.
[1] Add "boolean allowsPassByReference()" to the Invoker interface
directly
[2] Add "boolean allowsPassByReference()" to an optional SPI (either
a separate interface or a sub-interface of Invoker)
[3] Define an "InvokerProperties" interface to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", change the
Provider.createInvoker() to take InvokerProperties. Add
"getInvokerProperties()" to the Invoker interface.
[4] Define an "InvokerProperties" class to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", add
"getInvokerProperties()" to the Invoker interface.
[5] Define an "InvokerProperties" interface to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", define an
"InvocationPropertiesFactory" interface to create
"InvokerProperties", add "getInvokerProperties()" to the Invoker
interface.
My vote is [1], [2].
Thanks,
Raymond
Despite my request in [1], the option I proposed in [2] has not been
included in this vote. It may be that option [5] was intended to be
this option, but as stated here it has significant differences from
my proposal.
I'd like to request that this vote be withdrawn and restarted with
the option I proposed in [2] included. To avoid any possible ambiguity,
here is the summary wording for this option.
[n] Define an "InvokerProperties" interface to encapsulate known
properties including "allowsPassByReference", add an "InvokerProperties"
parameter to the createInvoker() method, and add "getInvokerProperties()"
to the Invoker interface.
Simon
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg28294.html
[2] http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg28086.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
