Do you have some good examples of shade working well, I've never ever seen it
be a good approach for frameworks.
On 27 Jun 2012, at 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> @Pete: DS can deliver fine grain modules which are nice for some part of
> the users and shade modules ("big jar") for advances user. Just a maven
> trick. this way everuone is happy and honestly today any nice IDE supports
> it without any issue.
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/27 Pete Muir <[email protected]>
>
>> It's insanely complex for a new user. Java is already confusing, with it's
>> hundreds of libs. Adding more complexity to packaging won't help with
>> DeltaSpike adoption IMO.
>>
>> On 27 Jun 2012, at 07:58, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> what's the issue? The thing to take care is to not create a module simply
>>> for integration. But a module by feature is fine and nice IMO.
>>>
>>> - Romain
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/6/27 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>> Romain, Arne.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please make suggestions which classes/features we should push into which
>>>> module. Any suggestion is welcome
>>>> I think our whole JPA functionality is not that huge and are just 30
>>>> classes overall. Splitting those into 6 modules (3x api + impl each)
>> might
>>>> really be too much!
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <
>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 1:07 PM
>>>>> Subject: AW: cdi-query
>>>>>
>>>>> I completely agree with Romain on that topic
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2012 11:46
>>>>> An: [email protected]
>>>>> Betreff: Re: cdi-query
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
