Understood. Thanks!
Adrian wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 15:23 +0100, Alexey Loubyansky wrote:
> This is for EJBs. We pass dependencies to the ServiceController which
> asks for ObjectName's.
Yes, but I'm saying that is wrong.
The old register(ObjectName name, Collection<ObjectName> dependencies)
is ok for backwards compatibily, but it isn't flexible enough
to do everything we want to do going forward,
like have an EJB depend on a POJO.
The EJB metadata is correct, the legacy ServiceController api
is too restrictive.
> Adrian wrote:
>> You should be able to depend upon a String for POJOs.
>>
>> On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 15:01 +0100, Alexey Loubyansky wrote:
>>> It currently returns Collection<String>. Are there reasons not to
change
>>> it to Collection<ObjectName> instead? We still need ObjectName's at
the end.
>>>
>>> Alexey
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jboss-development mailing list
>>> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development