jamesnetherton commented on a change in pull request #2342:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/pull/2342#discussion_r596187798
##########
File path:
extensions/solr/deployment/src/main/java/org/apache/camel/quarkus/component/solr/deployment/SolrProcessor.java
##########
@@ -35,4 +40,27 @@ FeatureBuildItem feature() {
ExtensionSslNativeSupportBuildItem activateSslNativeSupport() {
return new ExtensionSslNativeSupportBuildItem(FEATURE);
}
+
+ @BuildStep
+ void registerForReflection(BuildProducer<ReflectiveClassBuildItem>
reflectiveClass, CombinedIndexBuildItem combinedIndex) {
+ // Register any classes within the application archive that contain
the Solr Field annotation
+ combinedIndex.getIndex()
+ .getAnnotations(FIELD_DOT_NAME)
+ .stream()
+ .map(annotationInstance -> {
+ AnnotationTarget target = annotationInstance.target();
+ AnnotationTarget.Kind kind = target.kind();
+ if (kind.equals(AnnotationTarget.Kind.FIELD)) {
+ ClassInfo classInfo =
target.asField().declaringClass();
+ return new ReflectiveClassBuildItem(false, true,
classInfo.name().toString());
+ } else if (kind.equals(AnnotationTarget.Kind.METHOD)) {
+ ClassInfo classInfo =
target.asMethod().declaringClass();
+ return new ReflectiveClassBuildItem(true, false,
classInfo.name().toString());
+ } else {
+ throw new RuntimeException(
Review comment:
If the targets are extended, then presumably it'd be our job to handle
that? I.e our itests will fail and we make our extension compatible with the
new Solr changes.
With a warning wouldn't we just be silently ignoring it?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
