Details

    • Type: New Feature New Feature
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.1.1, 1.1.2
    • Fix Version/s: 1.2.3, 2.0.3, 1.1.3
    • Component/s: Core
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      for some artifacts it makes sense to define the order of execution when it comes to add-ons which have to extend extval in a very special way. that allows to force an execution order independent of the registration order.

      @InvocationOrder ... marks an artifact with a given order
      @InvocationOrderSupport... marks interfaces (instances of classes implementing these interfaces will be sorted internally)

      suggested ranges:
      negative values for very special cases
      0-49 for custom artifacts which should have the highest priority
      50-99 for add-ons which provide artifacts which should have a higher priority than the default artifacts
      100-999
      1000+ for custom artifacts

      a priority should be unique within one artifact-type - that means:
      if a name-mapper has priority 100, it's ok that an exception-interceptor also has priority 100.
      but a 2nd name-mapper shouldn't have priority 100 (if so - the order depends on the registration order)

        Activity

        No work has yet been logged on this issue.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Gerhard Petracek
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development