I'm developing background services for windows and linux using java with
tapestry IoC. This requires having a static method to be called and I use
this snippet to start my tapestry app:
System.out.println("Starting service.");
> RegistryBuilder builder = null;
> try {
> builder = new RegistryBuilder();
> System.out.println("Adding module as builder to tapestry registry.");
> builder.add(TestAgentModule.class);
> // builder.add(CoreModule.class);
> // builder.add(TestAgentCoreModule.class);
> System.out.println("Building tapestry registry.");
> registry = builder.build();
> System.out.println("Starting tapestry registry.");
> registry.performRegistryStartup();
> System.out.println("Tapestry registry started.");
> } catch (Throwable t) {
> System.out.println(t.getMessage());
> t.printStackTrace();
> }
In this environment, If I start my application with the highlighted
statements commented as they are, the commented modules wont start although
they are in the classpath. I get the desired behavior with web applications
but not with this environment ! But If I un-comment these lines, the
modules get injected as expected.
What did I miss here ? Assuming tapestry doesn't support auto-loading when
started in that way, can I stop having to add the manifest attribute "
Tapestry-Module-Classes" since it would be useless then ?
