No, this "private" functionality does not exist. I was merely throwing the idea around with Denis.
I think that denis is talking about implementing a new annotation (@ModulePrivate or similar) which you could add to service definitions. These services would then only be available within the SubModule and would not be exposed outside the SubModule. On Wednesday, 28 March 2012, fmaylinch <ferranmayli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Lance Java wrote >> >> Nice idea, so I guess in this case you include a submodule with a public >> and a private service including the private advice but only the public >> service is added to the top level module >> > > Do you mean using the @SubModule annotation? > And you think services included in submodules won't be available to other > modules? > Can you give us an example on how to do what you suggest? > > Thanks! > > -- > View this message in context: http://tapestry.1045711.n5.nabble.com/How-to-define-a-private-service-a-service-only-for-another-service-tp5597443p5600313.html > Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > >
