deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Porter <lightguard...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto
Date Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:53:43 GMT
On IRC I suggested @Deactivate, just to keep all the information here on
the list.

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 14:31, Gerhard Petracek
<gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>wrote:

> ok - i thought you mean it differently.
>
> however, in our discussion for codi i also didn't like the name (@Veto) a
> lot because it sounds strange for users who aren't aware of the concept of
> #veto.
>
> the suggestions were:
> @Ignore
> @Ignored
> @NoBean
> but we couldn't agree on one name and since @Typed() worked for us we
> didn't continue with it.
>
> since @Veto of seam-solder supports packages as well it's a different
> situation and e.g. @NoBean doesn't fit.
>
> -> +1 for adding it and +0 for keeping the name
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> 2011/12/14 Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
>
> > Yep, that's all @Veto does. At the class level @Typed() works fine for
> me,
> > perhaps different from a user's point of view, but not a big deal. @Veto
> > will work at a package level though. Do we feel like it's an important
> > feature?
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 13:56, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm, I think @Veto is perfectly fine, because all it does is:
> > > ProcessAnnotatedType#veto() isn't?
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > > PS: we decided to not add it to codi because @Typed() does roughly the
> > > same and doesn't add any Extension overhead. But actually I don't care
> > much
> > > about 5ms more...
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> > > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 9:36 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto
> > > >
> > > > we discussed such a feature for codi and didn't add it because of
> > > @Typed()
> > > >
> > > > @jason:
> > > > imo @Veto is the wrong name (if there is no real veto)
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > > gerhard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2011/12/14 Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > >>  Sort of, it doesn't really veto the bean though. You could still
> > inject
> > > > it
> > > >>  by using the concrete type.
> > > >>
> > > >>  On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 13:24, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>  > +1
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > Of course, the CDI-1.0 way to do this out of the box would be
a
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > @Typed()
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > It has a bit a different mechanic, but basically serves the
same
> > > goal.
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > LieGrue,
> > > >>  > strub
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  >
> > > >>  > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >>  > > From: Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
> > > >>  > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > >>  > > Cc:
> > > >>  > > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 9:05 PM
> > > >>  > > Subject: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > As per [1] we're discussing the top features from both
CODI
> > > > (core) and
> > > >>  > > Solder.
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > This issue is for @Veto [2] from Solder.
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > Basic idea:
> > > >>  > > Provide an easy way for application developers to veto
beans in
> > > > their
> > > >>  > > application. Of course users could create their own Extension
> and
> > > > veto
> > > >>  > that
> > > >>  > > way, this does all the boilerplate for them. All the users
need
> > > > to do
> > > >>  is
> > > >>  > > annotate the bean(s), or the package in package-info.java
and
> the
> > > >>  bean(s)
> > > >>  > > (all in the package if annotated at the package level)
will be
> > > > vetoed.
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > The suggestion is to keep the feature as it currently stands,
> > > >>  > essentially a
> > > >>  > > copy / paste (package name change) from Solder.
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > Please send +1 +0 -1 for this proposal.
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > If you have *basic* objections please add them to [3]
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> > > >>  > > [2]
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://docs.jboss.org/seam/3/3.1.0.CR1/reference/en-US/html/solder-programmingmodel.html#d0e338
> > > >>  > > [3]
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
> > > >>  > > --
> > > >>  > > Jason Porter
> > > >>  > > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> > > >>  > > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > Software Engineer
> > > >>  > > Open Source Advocate
> > > >>  > > Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  > > PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > > >>  > > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> > > >>  > >
> > > >>  >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>  --
> > > >>  Jason Porter
> > > >>  http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> > > >>  http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
> > > >>
> > > >>  Software Engineer
> > > >>  Open Source Advocate
> > > >>  Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
> > > >>
> > > >>  PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > > >>  PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jason Porter
> > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
> >
> > Software Engineer
> > Open Source Advocate
> > Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
> >
> > PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> >
>



-- 
Jason Porter
http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/lightguardjp

Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling

PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu

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