1 Reply Latest reply on Jan 17, 2007 10:27 AM by Adrian Brock

    ManagedProperty changes

    Scott Stark Master

      Two changes I need to allow for better use of ManagedProperty are to change the ManagedPropertyImpl managedObject field to be of type ManagedObject rather than ManagedObjectImpl (this is done and in the current snapshot), and also to allow a ManagedProperty to be disconnected from its ManagedObject as in not requiring this to be non-null.

      This is needed for deployment templates that just want to expose a set of properties that need to be applied to a template. The ManagedProperty are simple value type objects used to convey the required properties in order to populate the template.

        • 1. Re: ManagedProperty changes
          Adrian Brock Master

          Fair enough. The only reason for requiring a ManagedObject was that
          I thought the ManagedObject would be part of the identity.
          i.e. two properties with the same values but belonging to different managed objects
          would be different.

          See the "equals" implementation.

          It is generally desirable to have an immutable identity, i.e. no setManagedObject()

          If the properties are going to have a standalone identity then it is not an issue.