Yeah I saw that yesterday. Trying to go through the week of backlog and forgot :)
Sent from my iPhone On Jan 3, 2012, at 14:16, Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> wrote: > hi jason, > > we are currently discussing an alternative approach (see the discussion > about ExpressionActivated). > > since this approach would merge 3 features, it might be useful to start a > new thread. > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2012/1/3 Jason Porter <[email protected]> > >> +1 to @ProjectStageActivated >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 03:13, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> In practice @ProjectStageActivated was quite a killer feature which was >>> used _very_ often. >>> >>> In big projects you pretty often have the situation that you need to do >>> quite a few things different in the UnitTests, on the internal test >> servers >>> and on prodution servers! >>> >>> >>> We for example just mocked our MailService out with a >>> >>> @ProjectStageActivated(UnitTest.class) @Alternative public class >>> DummyMailService >>> >>> >>> which just logs the mails instead trashing our real mail servers... >>> >>> We also switch between different authentication implementations for our >>> test servers and production. >>> >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: John D. Ament <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Cc: >>>> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 2:14 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated >>>> >>>> My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage. >>>> ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the >>>> enterprise level). >>>> However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this. >>> Focusing >>>> on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration, >>> so >>>> +1 for ProjectStageActivated >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek < >>> [email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi, >>>>> >>>>> christian sent his opinion about the name. >>>>> >>>>> @others: >>>>> please also send your opinion. >>>>> >>>>> thx & regards, >>>>> gerhard >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> +1 for the basic concept >>>>>> +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hi @ all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> fyi: please check [1] before you answer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the basic concept: >>>>>>>> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible >>>> to veto bean >>>>>>>> implementations based on the current project-stage [3]. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> please send >>>>>>>> +1, +0 or -1 because... >>>>>>>> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept. >>>>>>>> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them >>>> to [4] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> regards, >>>>>>>> gerhard >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp >>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated >>>>>>>> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw >>>>>>>> [4] >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Christian Kaltepoth >>>>>> Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 >>
