tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Riedel <cr.ml...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: @Inject and Tapestry IoC
Date Tue, 21 Dec 2010 10:58:40 GMT
Hi Igor,

I'm not sure about the deprecation but generally it's a good idea, I think. Look at Hibernate
and JPA for example. They have kept their annotations and support the standard ones as well.
I like the idea of having the choice...


Am 21.12.2010 um 11:53 schrieb Igor Drobiazko:

> Well, I don't see any reasonable parameters for @Inject, @InjectService and
> @Scope. These annotations have been used for years and are more than stable.
> Again, we would not loose anything but gain a better adoption. Just think of
> the situation where you need to place @Inject on a constructor of a JavaBean
> for the BeanEditForm component. It just don't work in companies which reuse
> their models in different projects. Tapestry annotations in model classes is
> kind of a polution, but standard annotations are ok for most of developers.
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Tom van Dijk <tom@tvandijk.nl> wrote:
>> Actually, I'm not completely convinced yet.
>> Reason against: We might want to add parameters to the annotations. We
>> can't add them to the JSR-330 ones.
>> Counterargument: But on the other hand, we could place these additional
>> parameters, when and if we invent them, on a new annotation without creating
>> overlap with JSR-330
>> Tom.
>> Op 21-12-2010 9:20, Igor Drobiazko schreef:
>> Now that 5.2 is out, we can start working on 5.3. I'm going to add support
>>> for JSR-330: Dependency Injection for Java in the next days, weeks.
>>> I believe now it is time to think about whether we still need our own
>>> annotations for injection. I think that support of standard annotations
>>> would improve the adoption of Tapestry. Here are the overlappings of
>>> JSR-330
>>> and Tapestry IoC:
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.annotations.Inject = javax.inject.Inject
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.annotations.InjectService = javax.inject.Inject
>>> and
>>> javax.inject.Named
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.annotations.Scope = javax.inject.Scope
>>> Probably it makes sence to add a new depenendency for Tapestry IoC and not
>>> to provide a new library. I'd rather deprecate our own annotations and
>>> encourage people to move to standard annotations.
>>> What do you think?
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Igor Drobiazko
> http://tapestry5.de

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org

View raw message