March 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Missing class scope in InstantiateAction

by alesj

"alesj" wrote : But is this the right way? :-) e.g. do we need some explicit MetaData removal from KernelMetaDataRepository before we change the scope key in ScopeInfo? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138707#4138707 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138707

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Missing class scope in InstantiateAction

by alesj

"alesj" wrote : | What's the way to update ScopeInfo/MetaData with class information? | ScopeInfo scopeInfo = context.getScopeInfo(); | ScopeKey scopeKey = new ScopeKey(); | for (Scope scope : scopeInfo.getScope().getScopes()) | scopeKey.addScope(scope); | scopeKey.addScope(CommonLevels.CLASS, info.getClassInfo().getType()); | scopeInfo.setScope(scopeKey); | | OK, adding this after the BeanInfo has been set helps, since the metadata 'repairs' itself. But is this the right way? :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138699#4138699 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138699

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JCA on JBoss] - Re: JBAS-4662 Implementation details.

by vickyk

A quick changes on my local system got it working [vicky@localhost connector]$ svn diff | Index: src/main/org/jboss/resource/metadata/mcf/ManagedConnectionFactoryDeploymentGroup.java | =================================================================== | --- src/main/org/jboss/resource/metadata/mcf/ManagedConnectionFactoryDeploymentGroup.java (revision 71222) | +++ src/main/org/jboss/resource/metadata/mcf/ManagedConnectionFactoryDeploymentGroup.java (working copy) | @@ -61,7 +61,8 @@ | @XmlElement(name="no-tx-datasource", type=NoTxDataSourceDeploymentMetaData.class), | @XmlElement(name="xa-datasource", type=XADataSourceDeploymentMetaData.class), | @XmlElement(name="no-tx-connection-factory", type=NoTxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData.class), | - @XmlElement(name="tx-connection-factory",type=TxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData.class)}) | + @XmlElement(name="tx-connection-factory",type=TxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData.class), | + @XmlElement(name="ha-local-tx-datasource",type=HALocalDataSourceDeploymentMetaData.class)}) | private List<ManagedConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData> deployments = new ArrayList<ManagedConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData>(); | | /** The services */ | Index: src/main/org/jboss/resource/deployers/ManagedConnectionFactoryParserDeployer.java | =================================================================== | --- src/main/org/jboss/resource/deployers/ManagedConnectionFactoryParserDeployer.java (revision 71232) | +++ src/main/org/jboss/resource/deployers/ManagedConnectionFactoryParserDeployer.java (working copy) | @@ -40,12 +40,14 @@ | import org.jboss.resource.metadata.mcf.LocalDataSourceDeploymentMetaData; | import org.jboss.resource.metadata.mcf.NoTxDataSourceDeploymentMetaData; | import org.jboss.resource.metadata.mcf.TxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData; | +import org.jboss.resource.metadata.mcf.HALocalDataSourceDeploymentMetaData; | import org.jboss.resource.metadata.repository.JCAMetaDataRepository; | import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.LocalDSInstanceClassFactory; | import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.NoTxCFInstanceClassFactory; | import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.NoTxInstanceClassFactory; | import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.TxInstanceClassFactory; | import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.XADSInstanceClassFactory; | +import org.jboss.resource.deployers.management.HALocalDSInstanceClassFactory; | import org.jboss.virtual.VirtualFile; | import org.jboss.managed.api.ManagedObject; | import org.jboss.managed.api.ManagedProperty; | @@ -93,6 +95,7 @@ | moFactory.setInstanceClassFactory(NoTxDataSourceDeploymentMetaData.class, new NoTxInstanceClassFactory()); | moFactory.setInstanceClassFactory(TxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData.class, new TxInstanceClassFactory()); | moFactory.setInstanceClassFactory(NoTxConnectionFactoryDeploymentMetaData.class, new NoTxCFInstanceClassFactory()); | + moFactory.setInstanceClassFactory(HALocalDataSourceDeploymentMetaData.class, new HALocalDSInstanceClassFactory()); | } | | /** | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138697#4138697 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138697

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Missing class scope in InstantiateAction

by alesj

I'm trying to apply IoC annotations to beans that only get their BeanInfo available in InstantiateAction. | if (info == null) | { | info = configurator.getBeanInfo(object.getClass(), metaData.getAccessMode()); | context.setBeanInfo(info); | // handle custom annotations | applyAnnotations(context); | } | But I'm missing class scope (CommonLevels.CLASS) if the bean has no bean attribute defined in BeanMetaData, meaning it's gonna be constructed from some factory. Hence none of the class annotations are found in metadata. What's the way to update ScopeInfo/MetaData with class information? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138696#4138696 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138696

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: @SecurityDomain changes from AS42 to AS5

by wolfc

"alessio.soldano(a)jboss.com" wrote : Do you mean that the 4.2 package (org.jboss.annotation.security.SecurityDomain) was theoretically not good too? Yes, the package name should reflect the defining artifact or domain. Thus we can make sure there is no class name overlap. "anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : I did not create the annotation. I also did not refactor them or move them. I have just taken the task of cleaning up the ejb3 security integration for AS5. Given this, I feel for AS5, the annotation should be in the security spi project. As long as this doesn't create a dependency loop that would be perfect. "anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : I do not handle ejb3 stuff for Branch_4_2. That is where the issues for you exist. This is where Carlo/BillD/Scott should opine. Branch_4_2 is no longer being maintained. As for the original issue, just put both the annotations on your class. It requires that you have both versions of the jar on your classpath during compile, but not during runtime. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138693#4138693 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138693

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: @RunAs annotations on Servlet Classes

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

It should be in the last snapshot (3-4 days ago). I will be getting a new snapshot in today (to get my JBMETA-10 changes in). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138691#4138691 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138691

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: @SecurityDomain changes from AS42 to AS5

by anil.saldhana＠jboss.com

I did not create the annotation. I also did not refactor them or move them. I have just taken the task of cleaning up the ejb3 security integration for AS5. Given this, I feel for AS5, the annotation should be in the security spi project. I do not handle ejb3 stuff for Branch_4_2. That is where the issues for you exist. This is where Carlo/BillD/Scott should opine. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138690#4138690 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138690

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: @SecurityDomain changes from AS42 to AS5

by alessio.soldano＠jboss.com

"anil.saldhana(a)jboss.com" wrote : This is a package correction done by the ejb3 team. For AS5, I can move the annotation to "org.jboss.security.annotation.SecurityDomain" as this is the right place for the annotation. Do you mean that the 4.2 package (org.jboss.annotation.security.SecurityDomain) was theoretically not good too? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138688#4138688 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138688

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Build System] - Re: AS Components Bound to AS Release Cycle

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : I | But then again, the aspects project is an abortion anyway | I've been complaining about it for years :-( | | The transaction aspect should be in the transaction project, | the security aspect in the security project, etc..... | +100 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138687#4138687 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138687

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Field injection

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | Kabir says it is fixed in latest aop... Neither Ales nor I am sure what you mean has been fixed? Field interception will not work, and the proxy + delegate will be two different instances View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4138684#4138684 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4138684

18 years

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums March 2008