Re: [seam-dev] Interceptor packaging convention

Ok - so this means we are back to square one. Can we discuss and agree on the following guidelines? All @Interceptor classes must: 1. Adhere to the following package and naming scheme: org.jboss.seam.intercept.*Interceptor 2. Warn users (or Error out when appropriate) if they are using interceptable @Annotations when the @Inteceptor itself is not registered, and provide instructions to correct the configuration: (@Interceptor registration can be checked in the Extension class AfterBeanDiscovery via BeanManager.resolveInterceptors(type, interceptorBindings) All @Decorator classes must: 1. Adhere to the following package and naming scheme: org.jboss.seam.decorate.*Decorator Let's discuss and resolve, since we're starting to release, and this is important. (Affects Faces directly.) Thanks, Lincoln On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On 11 Apr 2010, at 05:11, Gavin King wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > >> BTW A slightly better approach (which avoids at least the nastiness of > this approach, but > >> doesn't avoid the issue of ordering - which IMO is insurmountable) is > to write a > >> SeamInterceptor which can cope with using relative ordering semantics > and require users > >> to just enable that. > > > > Sure, but the problem is that then you can't interleave other > > interceptors with the Seam interceptors. > > Perhaps I should have prefaced it "a slightly better-than-terrible way" > ;-) > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev > -- Lincoln Baxter, III http://ocpsoft.com http://scrumshark.com "Keep it Simple"