geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [OSGi] Support for RFC 124?
Date Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:41:48 GMT
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 00:06, Jarek Gawor <jgawor@gmail.com> wrote:
> Either way works for me. First, I would rather stay with the API
> classes and interfaces defined by the spec (I was working of the draft
> 3 of the specification).

AFAIK, we use the same api.

> Second, I do like Rick's deep copy
> constructor. I would like to keep it even if it's not being
> used/needed now. But we can always add that later.

Right, sounds good.  I'd like to here from Rick though if there was a
specific purpose for doing that.

Btw, I will be offline most of the week, so feel free to refactor the
code at will.

> So go ahead and merge my code into yours and put the new code
> somewhere directly under the sandbox and we'll start working from
> there. In the mean time, I'll work on some other aspects of the spec
> while you merge this stuff.
>
> Thanks,
> Jarek
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree that we need to join forces.
>> Actually, i have started experimenting with xbean-refect after having
>> seen your code :-)
>>
>> If we are going to use generics in the implementation, it may be
>> easier to use the reflect package implementation classes that i wrote.
>> Anyway, I think the main difference is that the one Rick wrote allow
>> deep copy of values with a copy constructor.  Rick, have you seen such
>> a need anywhere in the spec ?  While implementing the parser, I
>> haven't seen the need for it so I wonder if we need to keep that or
>> not.
>> The parser has dependencies on those classes, so we need to merge /
>> refactor here.
>>
>> I'm currently working on integrating your code into mine, but we could
>> do the opposite if you prefer.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 22:17, Jarek Gawor <jgawor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Btw, I'm not so sure iPojo is a good candidate for implementing the
>>>> blueprint service.
>>>> I've began doing some testing with xbean-reflect and I am able to
>>>> parse and instanciate very simple beans.
>>>> See:
>>>>   https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/gnodet/blueprint/org.apache.felix.blueprint/src/test/java/org/apache/felix/blueprint/WiringTest.java
>>>> and the blueprint xml
>>>>   https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/gnodet/blueprint/org.apache.felix.blueprint/src/test/resources/test-wiring.xml
>>>
>>> Since you're not using iPojo now there is no point of having two
>>> separate efforts of implementing rfc124. So I think we should merge
>>> into one project. For example, let's take your parser and integrate
>>> with my (and Rick's) code and go from there. I already experimented
>>> with xbean-reflect and I think it might work but will need some extra
>>> modifications.
>>>
>>> Jarek
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Mime
View raw message