javaee-api in openejb for instance: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/trunk/javaee-api/pom.xml
- Romain 2012/6/27 Pete Muir <[email protected]> > 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 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
