Details
-
Type:
New Feature
-
Status:
Closed
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Cannot Reproduce
-
Affects Version/s: 1.0-RC-1
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: None
-
Labels:None
-
Number of attachments :
Description
Me and Aslak removed the feature of implementing lifecycle in instantiation order because we couldn't figure out a clean way of doing it in our current design.
The correct behaviour should have been:
start - execute in order of instantiation.
stop and dispose - execute in reversed order of instantiation.
The current behaviour is:
start, stop and dispose - executed in order of registration.
We should not implement this feature until it is specifically asked for or required by our users.
Activity
The test case to prove this issue "cannot reproduce" is committed:
DefaultPicoContainerLifecycleTestCase.testOrderOfStartShouldBeDependencyOrderAndStopAndDisposeTheOpposite
Can we close this issue?
Aslak Hellesøy
added a comment - The test case to prove this issue "cannot reproduce" is committed:
DefaultPicoContainerLifecycleTestCase.testOrderOfStartShouldBeDependencyOrderAndStopAndDisposeTheOpposite
Can we close this issue? My misunderstanding. Sorry 
Jon Tirsen
added a comment - My misunderstanding. Sorry Jon Tirsen
made changes -
| Field | Original Value | New Value |
|---|---|---|
| Status | Open [ 1 ] | Closed [ 6 ] |
| Resolution | Fixed [ 1 ] |
Aslak Hellesøy
made changes -
| Status | Closed [ 6 ] | Reopened [ 4 ] |
| Resolution | Fixed [ 1 ] |
Just changing resolution to "cannot reproduce" and setting the fix version to "none" since this feature was only missing for a few days and has been working fine for a while.
It was fixed here: http://cvs.codehaus.org/viewcvs.cgi/java/picocontainer/src/java/org/picocontainer/defaults/DefaultPicoContainer.java?r1=1.58&r2=1.59&root=picocontainer
Aslak Hellesøy
added a comment - Just changing resolution to "cannot reproduce" and setting the fix version to "none" since this feature was only missing for a few days and has been working fine for a while.
It was fixed here: http://cvs.codehaus.org/viewcvs.cgi/java/picocontainer/src/java/org/picocontainer/defaults/DefaultPicoContainer.java?r1=1.58&r2=1.59&root=picocontainer Aslak Hellesøy
made changes -
| Fix Version/s | 2.0 [ 10411 ] | |
| Resolution | Cannot Reproduce [ 5 ] | |
| Assignee | Aslak Hellesoy [ rinkrank ] | |
| Status | Reopened [ 4 ] | Closed [ 6 ] |
Jon, I think you are wrong and I don't recognise what you are referring to when you say we have removed this feature. I'm working on a test case to verify that start() is still called in instantiation order. (and stop()/dispose() in the reverse order).
In any case, I think that having lifecycle methods called in the instantiation order is already required by several users and developers, Paul and myself being some of them.
I'll get back to this shortly.