I think it could, but that moves into
designing the solution rather than agreeing on the guidelines for solutions.
Rich
Richard Jacob <>
03/07/05 05:21 AM
To
Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Subject
RE: [wsrp] Issue #31: handleEvent
or handleEvents?
comment on 3+4.
why could a event processing failure not be in turn an event of its own.
In
that case portlets could simply sign for such events.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / best regards,
Richard Jacob
______________________________________________________
IBM Lab Boeblingen, Germany
Dept.8288, WebSphere Portal Server Development
WSRP Standardization Technical Lead
Phone: ++49 7031 16-3469 - Fax: ++49 7031 16-4888
Email: mailto:
Rich Thompson
<
m>
To
03/04/2005 08:16
cc
PM
Subject
RE: [wsrp]
Issue #31: handleEvent
or handleEvents?
This issue has been discussed under an email subject line of " [wsrp]
handleEvent or handleEvents?". Before tailing off, this thread came
to
several guidelines for any solution moving this operation back to a bulk
character:
1. Portlets are loosely coupled components integrated onto the page by
the
Consumer.
2. Events are independent notifications that something has occurred, which
receiving portlets may use to impact their state.
3. There are times when a Consumer will care what failures have occurred
(e.g. for retry purposes).
4. Portlets should be able to indicate they also care about event
processing failures.
Any additional comments before we move to drafting a solution?
Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:
