There are hundreds of opinions on this, ranging from really fine grained, to just a single jar.
We have to compromise and be flexible. There is no one rule here. On 27 Jun 2012, at 05:46, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Still not totally agree on modules stuff (should it be pushed in another > thread?), in particular from a user perspective. I think allowing users to > take small bundle or an already aggregated one (shade) is a great feature. > > - Romain > > > 2012/6/27 Thomas Hug <[email protected]> > >> @Mark, +1 on not being excessive on the amount of modules. As a user I >> don't think I'd like maintaining another x dependencies, those POMs are >> usually big enough :-) Anyway, depending on the amount of features >> integrating for such a query API, that might well fall into the "decent >> size" category. >> >> @Pete, +1 for the ServiceHandler - IMO very convenient when using methods >> just as metadata (e.g. for calling stored procs, obviously JPA queries or a >> JAX-RS client). >> >> @Jason, Bernard: Agree that I have rarely used the Home API in a >> productive application, still I found it quite handy for prototyping. Could >> be useful to add this on top of a query API (and create e.g. a Forge >> scaffolding provider?). >> >> Cheers, >> Tom >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark Struberg [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 07:58 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: cdi-query >> >> I fear that would get us into jarmageddon... >> >> We discussed the module structure at the very beginning, and we all >> concluded that there are 2 reasons for introducing a new module: >> .) a dependency to another project or EE api (like jta, jpa, jsf) >> .) an area which is an completely own block and has a decent size (min >> ~30..50 new classes) >> >> Since the whole JPA area doesn't have more than 10 classes yet, I do not >> see a reason for introducing a new API for them. >> >> Also the whole EE vs SE is moot imo. Either we have a new API or not. The >> classic J2EE patterns are dead dead dead anyway. EE-6 gave us much better >> possibilities, so we should use them and not fall back to _old_ EE patterns. >> >> What we could do is to disucss whether the 'jta' module would better >> called 'deltaspike-jpa-ee' and not only contain JTA but also >> TransactionAttributeType handling from EJB? >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:30 AM >>> Subject: Re: cdi-query >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> - Romain >>> >>> >>> 2012/6/26 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> >>> >>>> @ pete: >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> @ java-se vs java-ee features: >>>> >>>> we can think about a more fine-grained structure (similar to seam3). >>>> e.g.: >>>> deltaspike-jpa-transaction >>>> deltaspike-jpa-query >>>> ... >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> gerhard >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/6/25 Pete Muir <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> Well, we were looking for some good use cases for the ServiceHandler. >>>>> >>>>> I would be in support of adding it to DS core, now we have a >>>> strong >>> use >>>>> case. >>>>> >>>>> Property util should not be controversial. Maybe we can improve >>> it's API >>>>> whilst we are at it :-) >>>>> >>>>> On 25 Jun 2012, at 10:25, Thomas Hug wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Eventually this came in a little early, but it's already on >>> the radar: >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-60 >>>>>> >>>>>> The current implementation mainly depends on the Solder >>> ServiceHandler >>>>> (as far as I remember not yet in DS, waiting for CDI 1.1) and the >>>> Property > utils. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Tom >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> Von: Mark Struberg [[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Montag, >>>> 25. Juni 2012 14:21 > > An: [email protected] >>>>>> Betreff: Re: cdi-query >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 great stuff to review and add them! >>>>>> >>>>>> That would fit great into the deltaspike-jpa module, wdyt? >>>>>> >>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>> strub >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: Pete Muir <[email protected]> > >> To: >>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> Cc: >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 1:53 PM > >> Subject: Re: >>>> cdi-query > >> > >> IMO this would be a great thing to add! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 24 Jun 2012, at 16:56, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> just browsed >>>>> http://ctpconsulting.github.com/query/1.0.0.Alpha4/index.html >>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> it is really amazing (a spring-data CDI oriented). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> it is currently based on solder but since DS integrates a >>> lot of this >>>>> stuff >>>>>>>> i wonder if it could be integrated in DS in a really >>> portable way? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Romain >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
