deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] re-visit "annotation" package/s
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:26:28 GMT
IMO we can begore being tlp change it (notifying tools we know).

Then well need to handle @deprecated for at least ine release...would hurt
in code for nthg IMHO
Le 2 avr. 2013 23:23, "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Mark,
>
> In this case it's about the related tooling that broke.  Until JBIDE fixes
> this, users will end up with the wrong annotations in their code.
>
> IMHO, I'm not saying no we can't change things like this, but if we do
> change them and there are known downstream impacts for tools that support
> DS we should let those tools know what we are doing before we make the
> change.
>
> John
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> > nope, TLP only means maturity on the social/community side.
> >
> > For any users it's just a matter of 2 minutes doing a search/replace on
> > the imports and then rebuild their app.
> > That's nothing which we cannot do easily.
> >
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > To: gudnabrsam@gmail.com; deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 10:13 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] re-visit "annotation" package/s
> > >
> > > I dont fully agree even if i get you. For a bunch of people tlp =
> > maturity
> > > = stability
> > > Le 2 avr. 2013 21:47, "Matt Benson" <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >>  I would agree with Gerhard that TLP and 1.0 are not necessarily
> linked
> > >>  concepts.  I would think most developers would not be surprised by
> the
> > idea
> > >>  that any release number < 1.0 is not guaranteed not to change.
> > >>
> > >>  Matt
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>  On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Cody Lerum <cody.lerum@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  > Works for me. I was only using @Excludes and I can just switch to
> > >>  @Typed()
> > >>  >
> > >>  >
> > >>  > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:57 PM, John D. Ament
> > > <john.d.ament@gmail.com
> > >>  > >wrote:
> > >>  >
> > >>  > > If that's the case, we should target it for 0.4 and forward.
> > >>  > >
> > >>  > >
> > >>  > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>  > rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > >>  > > >wrote:
> > >>  > >
> > >>  > > > +1 after first tlp release to be exact
> > >>  > > > Le 2 avr. 2013 20:38, "John D. Ament"
> > > <john.d.ament@gmail.com> a
> > >>  > écrit :
> > >>  > > >
> > >>  > > > > Once DS is a TLP, we should try avoiding breaking
> > > integrations.
> > >>  > > > >
> > >>  > > > >
> > >>  > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > >>  > > > > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > >>  > > > > > wrote:
> > >>  > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > that can happen until v1 (and not until deltaspike
> > > is a tlp).
> > >>  > > > > > (it was one of our first agreements.)
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > regards,
> > >>  > > > > > gerhard
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > 2013/4/2 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > Think people know ds is not yet a tlp so
some
> > > instability is
> > >>  fine
> > >>  > > > IMHO
> > >>  > > > > > > Le 2 avr. 2013 20:00, "Cody Lerum"
> > > <cody.lerum@gmail.com> a
> > >>  > écrit
> > >>  > > :
> > >>  > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > One small problem is the early
> > > integration of DS into JBoss
> > >>  > > Tools -
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-13901
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > I don't know how many people if any
> > > are using that
> > >>  integration
> > >>  > > yet.
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Pete
> > > Muir <pmuir@redhat.com>
> > >>  > > > wrote:
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > +1 to drop, I hate them.
> > >>  > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > On 1 Apr 2013, at 10:06, Christian
> > > Kaltepoth <
> > >>  > > > > christian@kaltepoth.de
> > >>  > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>  > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > +1 for dropping
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > 2013/3/31 Cody Lerum
> > > <cody.lerum@gmail.com>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >> drop em.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013
at
> > > 10:35 AM, Mark Struberg <
> > >>  > > > > > struberg@yahoo.de>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>> yes, let's drop
> > > them. annotations are like interfaces
> > >>  > > > nowadays.
> > >>  > > > > > So
> > >>  > > > > > > > this
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >> is
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>> just superfluous.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>> LieGrue,
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>> strub
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>> ----- Original Message
> > > -----
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> From: Gerhard
> > > Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> To:
> > > deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> Cc:
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> Sent: Sunday,
> > > March 31, 2013 5:30 PM
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> Subject: [DISCUSS]
> > > re-visit "annotation" package/s
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> hi @ all,
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> we had an
> > > agreement to use a (sub-)package named
> > >>  > > > "annotation"
> > >>  > > > > > for
> > >>  > > > > > > > all
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> our
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> annotations within
> > > a package.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> however, it feels
> > > a bit clumsy if a package
> > >>  (currently)
> > >>  > > just
> > >>  > > > > > > > contains
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> annotations.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> e.g.
> > > org.apache.deltaspike.core.api.exclude only
> > >>  > contains
> > >>  > > > the
> > >>  > > > > > > > package
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > "annotation".
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> currently we
have
> > > a mixture (some parts are using the
> > >>  > > > > > "annotation"
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> package
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> and some
> > > don't)
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> -> we have
to
> > > align it the one way or the other.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> i'm currently
> > > in favour of dropping the
> > >>  > > > > "annotation"-package/s.
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> regards,
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>> gerhard
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >>
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > --
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > Christian Kaltepoth
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > Blog:
> > > http://blog.kaltepoth.de/
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > Twitter:
> > > http://twitter.com/chkal
> > >>  > > > > > > > > > GitHub:
> > > https://github.com/chkal
> > >>  > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > > >
> > >>  > > > > >
> > >>  > > > >
> > >>  > > >
> > >>  > >
> > >>  >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

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