jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Guggisberg (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Resolved] (OAK-32) Drop MicroKernel.dispose()
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2012 13:12:37 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-32?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel

Stefan Guggisberg resolved OAK-32.

       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 0.3
         Assignee: Stefan Guggisberg

fixed as proposed in svn r1345141

the MicroKernelFactory issue (who should MicroKernel instances ideally be created) has not
been adressed. 
> Drop MicroKernel.dispose()
> --------------------------
>                 Key: OAK-32
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-32
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: mk
>            Reporter: Jukka Zitting
>            Assignee: Stefan Guggisberg
>             Fix For: 0.3
>         Attachments: OAK-32.patch
> Just like a client of the MicroKernel interface doesn't know how a MK instance is created,
there should not be a need for a client to be able to dispose an instance. For example the
lifecycle of a MK instance running as an OSGi service (or any other component framework) is
managed by the framework, not by clients. Thus I suggest that the MicroKernel.dispose() method
is removed.
> The only piece of code that's notably affected by this change is the MicroKernelFactory
class still in oak-core and any client code that uses it to construct new MicroKernel instances.
I think we should replace the MKF class with a more generic solution as outlined in OAK-17.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message