deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From José Rodolfo Freitas <joserodolfo.frei...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto
Date Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:43:52 GMT
My vote would be "non-binding" but I think:

+1 for @Veto or @Ignore
+0 for @Deactivate.

I personally believe that @Veto sounds really good.



On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:44 AM, Martin Kouba <mkouba@redhat.com> wrote:

> IMHO @Veto is fine - both the name (that corresponds to CDI API) and the
> way it works in solder.
>
> @Ignore as a name seems also acceptable.
>
> +0 for @Deactivate - this may be confusing since vetoed
> (javax.enterprise.inject.spi.**ProcessAnnotatedType.veto()) beans are de
> facto never "activated".
>
> Anyway this discussion should consider the fact that CDI 1.1 will contain
> the same functionality - see [1].
>
> Martin
>
> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/**browse/CDI-50<https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-50>
>
>
> Dne 14.12.2011 23:23, Gerhard Petracek napsal(a):
>
>  +1 for @Deactivate
>> +0 for the others
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/12/14 Jason Porter<lightguard.jp@gmail.com**>
>>
>>  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<gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.**apache.org<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<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<http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp>
>>>>>>>>  >  >  [2]
>>>>>>>>  >  >
>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>  http://docs.jboss.org/seam/3/**3.1.0.CR1/reference/en-US/**
>>> html/solder-programmingmodel.**html#d0e338<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<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking>
>>>
>>>>  >  >  --
>>>>>>>>  >  >  Jason Porter
>>>>>>>>  >  >  http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.**com<http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
>>>>>>>>  >  >  http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp<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://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
>>>>>>>>  http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp<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://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
>>>>> http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp <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://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
>>> http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp <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