[jsr-314-open] No @PhaseListener annotation in JSF 2.0?

[Jason Lee]

Ryan and I had the same discussion on IRC.  Makes sense, I guess, but  
I wish there were a way around that. :|

On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:57 PM, Dan Allen wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Ed Burns <Ed.Burns at sun.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 17:30:57 -0400, Neil Griffin <neil.griffin at liferay.com 
> > said:
>
> NG> Hi Guys,
> NG> I can't remember -- was it a conscious decision to not have a
> NG> @PhaseListener annotation in JSF 2.0?
>
> Yes, we decided not to have it because we'd need lots of additional
> information related to the timing of discovery.
>
> As I was driving down the road, this exact thought occurred to me.  
> The annotation would have to support ordering for phase listeners in  
> the same classpath and it would end up being pretty complicated.
>
> Btw, it's the same reason interceptors have to be declared/activated  
> in an XML file for JSR-299.
>
> -Dan
>
> -- 
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
> Registered Linux User #231597
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan

Jason Lee, SCJP
President, Oklahoma City Java Users Group
Senior Java Developer, Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.steeplesoft.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20090805/9fdf6978/attachment.html