| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Michael Rowley | Sep 25, 2007 3:21 pm | |
| Barack, Ron | Oct 4, 2007 2:30 am | |
| Michael Rowley | Oct 4, 2007 6:30 am | |
| Michael Rowley | Oct 18, 2007 11:48 am | |
| David Booz | Nov 1, 2007 9:53 am | |
| Michael Rowley | Nov 5, 2007 8:53 am | |
| Simon Nash | Nov 5, 2007 10:46 am | |
| Reza Shafii | Nov 5, 2007 10:54 am | |
| Simon Nash | Nov 5, 2007 1:10 pm | |
| David Booz | Nov 7, 2007 12:59 pm | |
| Blohm, Henning | Nov 8, 2007 5:55 am | |
| Michael Rowley | Nov 14, 2007 1:34 am | |
| Michael Rowley | Nov 14, 2007 1:34 am | |
| David Booz | Nov 14, 2007 7:41 am | |
| Simon Nash | Nov 14, 2007 2:46 pm |
| Subject: | NEW ISSUE: Local services expose implementation classes as their type | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Michael Rowley (mrow...@bea.com) | |
| Date: | Sep 25, 2007 3:21:44 pm | |
| List: | org.oasis-open.lists.sca-j | |
TARGET: Java Common Annotations and APIs specification
Java Component Implementation Specification
Section titled: "Local and Remotable Services"
DESCRIPTION:
Currently, this section states the following:
If an implementation class has implemented interfaces that are not decorated with an @Remotable annotation, the class is considered to implement a single local service whose type is defined by the class.
This is unfortunate, since the extremely common pattern of:
class FooImpl implements Foo {}
Will result in a component that offers a service whose type is FooImpl (assuming that Foo hasn't been marked as @Remotable).
It should be possible for this pattern to result in a service whose type is the Foo interface.
PROPOSAL:
Introduce a new interface annotation called @Local. If a component implementation implements an interface that has been marked as @Local, then the component type will include a service whose type is that interface.





