cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: SeachConditionBuilder for CXF JAX-RS clients
Date Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:10:33 GMT
Hi Andy

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Andrzej Michalec <
andrzej.michalec@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Actually, I added a test to the JAXRSAtomPushLoggingSpringTest which
> > searches the log records using the queries like
> 'level==INFO,level==WARN'.
> > And for that to work I had to make the change to FIQLParser to ensure
> that
> > SimpleSearchCondition was only initialized with the map of properties
> > which
> > were specified in the query given that LogRecord has the dozen (or so
> :-))
> > of other properties. Thus I'm not sure why to fail the match if the
> > property, even it is primitive, is not even checked ?
> ...
> > Are you saying you are ok with reverting the change ? If yes then +1.
>
> Sergey, all I am saying is I need to change the implementation a bit. After
> that I will revert/re-enable tests to have everything working as it should
> be.
>
>
Super :-).


> > SearchConditionBuilder will be part of the 2.4 release so it will be a
> new
> > feature, or may be rather the enhancement toward making the search
> feature
> > more complete as it will facilitate using FIQL on the client side...
>
> Agreed. I just asked when it is planned. Despite the date I will make this
> fix ASAP ;)
>
>
ok, and please let me know if any help is needed. I think we have at least 2
weeks.

While we will talk about it as the new feature/enhancement, I think we can
definitely afford not to freeze the interface(s) for a bit. It would be
great if say between 2.4.0 and 2.4.1/2 maintenance releases we could get
some feedback from the early adopters, it's very hard at this stage to come
up with the perfect solution. Example, I think this interface will be of
great use for people writing tests and the specific code where the number of
options is limited and/or known in advance. I'd like to understand better
and may be try to do some demo where custom HTML forms are introduced
letting users do arbitrary queries and then see if some relevant changes are
needed...

> May be we can make SearchConditionBuilder an abstract class? Have an
> > internal FiqlSearchConditionBuilder as the default instance ...
>
> Yeap, you have just verbalized what I wanted to do.
>
> Sorry about it Andy, can't help it, not a great habit :-)

thanks, Sergey


> cheers,
> -andy.
>
> PS. what do you think about Robert's suggestion on usecases map? Shall we
> have separate thread on this?
>
> Having the usecases map is a good idea. We can definitely add few entries
to that map :-)

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