commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [privilizer] promotion plan
Date Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:05:55 GMT
FWIW, Simone and I had, in the past, discussed privately whether some tree
of post-compilation tools might make a sensible family of commons component
modules.  We had originally been thinking along the lines of JDK6
annotation processors, which [*privilizer] is not (no open API exists
allowing these to modify bytecode), but the basic principle applies...
Note that [attributes] was/is more or less this type of component.

Matt


On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:

>
> +1
>
> It might fit to any component which does _not_ introduce a runtime
> dependency but is only needed at compile time. Basically the privilizer is
> kind of a preprocessor.
>
> If such a kind of component already exists in commons, then we can look if
> it fits to the business of this component. Otherwise it's a new module imo.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
> > To: Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:08 PM
> > Subject: Re: [privilizer] promotion plan
> >
> > Hi Gary,
> >   Feel free to suggest one or more alternate names, and we can vote on
> > them!  The intent is to quickly convey that the component "equips your
> code
> > to run in a Java security constrained environment," thus
> > "privilizer" or
> > "that which makes your code privileged."  Since the main use of the
> > component is to instrument compiled code during the build process (a
> > possible future enhancement is to support RT enhancement in a custom
> > classloader), I don't see that it fits into any existing component, but
> am
> > open to correction.
> >
> > Thanks for your interest,
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Gary Gregory
> > <garydgregory@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >>  Another aspect to consider is would this new "privalizer"
> > component (not
> >>  crazy about the name ATM) fit in an existing Commons component?
> >>
> >>
> >>  On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>  Hi all,
> >>>    As long as I've been part of the Commons community I don't
> > know that
> >>>  I've
> >>>  encountered this exact situation:  a committer adds some code to the
> >>>  sandbox that is more or less complete.  I don't know precisely what
> >>>  requirements must be met before we promote [privilizer] to proper. We
> > seem
> >>>  to have interest from one or more members of the PMC as prospective
> > users;
> >>>  this would seem to imply that were I hit by a bus there ought to be
> >>>  someone
> >>>  interested in maintaining the component.  Speaking for BVal I intend
> to
> >>>  put
> >>>  this component to immediate use there (that's what I wrote it
> > for!).  Mark
> >>>  has mentioned that OWB and perhaps other ASF projects might want to
> > make
> >>>  use of it.  What else do I need to do?
> >>>
> >>>  Matt
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  --
> >>  E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> >>  JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> >>  Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> >>  Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> >>  Home: http://garygregory.com/
> >>  Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >>
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message