directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: [jira] Created: (DIRSERVER-1059) Interceptor bypass logic is flawed
Date Tue, 11 Sep 2007 07:27:53 GMT
I hope you guys don't run off and implement something for this  
without first accepting or rejecting my proposal to eliminate  

One possibility is to configure the interceptor chains in spring or  
the equivalent.  There are only about 5 or 6 different chains at the  
moment IIUC so a "named chain" that is known to the container and  
injected to the points that need it might work.  Then if someone adds  
an interceptor in say the spring configuration they can decide  
exactly which chains it belongs in.  IIRC this is approximately what  
jetspeed does with its interceptor chaings.

OpenEjb takes a very different approach by not having the ability to  
configure interceptor chains at all: if you want radically different  
behavior you write a new container class.  There are some integration  
points where most behavior anyone wants can be configured, such as  
the geronimo integration.  IIUC the basic point of view of this  
approach is that there are only a very few points in the chain where  
custonization is approprate, so only those points can be customized:  
the correct behavior of the rest of the container is just hardcoded.   
Triggers/stored procedures form one such obvious extension point but  
aren't currently powerful enough to be all that is needed.  Possibly  
a declarative referential integrity facility together with triggers  
would be enough.

david jencks

On Sep 10, 2007, at 7:19 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny (JIRA) wrote:

> Interceptor bypass logic is flawed
> ----------------------------------
>                  Key: DIRSERVER-1059
>                  URL: 
>              Project: Directory ApacheDS
>           Issue Type: Bug
>     Affects Versions: 1.5.1
>             Reporter: Emmanuel Lecharny
>              Fix For: 1.5.2
> We currently have many places in the code where we are hard-coding  
> the bypassed interceptor (ie, the interceptors which won't be called).
> I think this logic is flawed : as we can add new interceptors,  
> those newly interceptors will be called, or the code where those  
> bypasses are declared should be modified.
> Reverting the logic won't help : if we create a list of called  
> interceptors instead of a list of bypassed interceptors, then we  
> will still have to modify the code to add those new interceptors in  
> the chain.
> Some other way to handle interceptors should be find to allow users  
> to add new interceptors without any problem.
> -- 
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message