all,
Adding @Instantiate annotation to the service provider component fixed the issue. I hope it will be added to the official annotation tutorial page in the future. thank you, nobu On 21 July 2016 at 15:27, Harunobu Oyama <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > I have just started learning iPojo as the component framework for my karaf > application. > > I tried their maven tutorial, which has three bundles, interface, service > provider, and client. > It uses metadata.xml to provide meta data for iPojo. It worked fine as > expected. > > When I moved onto annotation based approach, I did the followings. > - removed metadata.xml from service provider and client > - added dependency to ipojo annotation package > - added annotations to the service provider source code and client > source code > > However, it did not work. > > By having a closer look, it turned out that the client was working fine > but the service > provider was not working properly. > > The annotations I added to the service provider class were > - @Component and > - @Provides > as shown on their annotation tutorial. > > > The bundle state on the web client showed some difference between xml > based service > provider and the annotation based service provider. > > XML based service provider's status shows: > > Service ID 183 Types: org.apache.felix.ipojo.extender.TypeDeclaration > Service ID 184 Types: org.apache.felix.ipojo.extender.InstanceDeclaration > Service ID 185 Types: org.apache.felix.ipojo.Factory > Service PID: HelloProviderrr > Service ID 186 Types: org.apache.felix.ipojo.architecture.Architecture > Service ID 187 Types: ipojo.example.hello.Hello > > > while Annotation based one does not show Service ID 183, 186, or 187. > And also iPOJO-Components does not have instance attribute, which exists > in XML based version. It looks like the instance attribute was created from > <instance> element of the metadata.xml. > > > Could somebody tell me how to fix the difference? > > thank you, > Harunobu Oyama > > > > > >
