deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marius Bogoevici <marius.bogoev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: XML Config
Date Mon, 10 Sep 2012 13:20:24 GMT
Generally speaking, I think it would be good to have a mechanism for 
configuring beans that does not require re-compilation - may be of 
limited use in greenfield applications, but above all with 
brownfield/legacy code. In fairness, for the latter one could use 
producers and such, but it may still be a PITA in some cases.

Now, the key here IMO would be to have a scriptable (no recompilation) 
and toolable DSL outside the annotation system. It so happens that of 
all the options, XML is IMO the most common and better understood by the 
average developer. If we manage to define a proper intermediate model 
for this mechanism, then there could be plenty of other options (yaml, 
or even Groovy or Ruby if one so wishes) to add on later.


On 2012-09-10 3:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> what does bring xml? i think that's the point
>
> if it is only to get a format with hierarchy  you can use yaml for instance
>
> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau*
> *Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com*
>
>
>
>
> 2012/9/10 Bernard Łabno <s4237@pjwstk.edu.pl>
>
>> If you find elegant way to do everything that can be currently done then
>> it's cool not to use XML, but if we won't be able to i.e. configure bean
>> properties between compilation and deployment then it will be great
>> disappointment.
>>
>> 2012/9/10 Charles Moulliard <ch007m@gmail.com>
>>
>>> I would prefer that we avoid to use XML. Otherwise, end users will be
>>> confused about what a CDI / CDI Extension should looks like and why we
>> are
>>> moving one step down to do what Spring / Xbean are doing.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why i would like to use files (i find xml too verbose) is for constants
>>>> (uri for instance) or alternative/interceptor (as mentionned)
>>>>
>>>> Today i find other use case the translation of bad design
>>>>
>>>> ...just my opinion maybe
>>>> Le 7 sept. 2012 23:01, "Jason Porter" <lightguard.jp@gmail.com> a
>> écrit
>>> :
>>>>> Mark, Pete and I discussed a little bit about the XML config (from
>>>> Solder)
>>>>> on IRC today. We quickly decided that we needed to move over to the
>>>> mailing
>>>>> list for more input, and to make things official.
>>>>>
>>>>> As things currently exist in the Solder XML Config, it's probably not
>>>>> portable and would really need some of the changes in CDI 1.1 to work
>>>>> properly. We also discussed throwing out the idea of completely
>>>> configuring
>>>>> beans via XML and using the XML config for other tasks such as
>> applying
>>>>> interceptors and the like via regex or similar ideas, in other words
>>>> having
>>>>> it being a subset of what currently exists today. What is in Solder
>> is
>>>> very
>>>>> similar to configuring beans via XML in Spring, and we feel that
>>> paradigm
>>>>> has sailed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm starting this thread to get some other ideas about what we should
>>> do
>>>>> for XML config and also see what people think.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Charles Moulliard
>>> Apache Committer / Sr. Pr. Consultant at FuseSource.com
>>> Twitter : @cmoulliard
>>> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>>>


Mime
View raw message