@ pete: see e.g. the (shaded) all-in-one bundles (for jsf 1.2, 2.x,...) of myfaces codi.
regards, gerhard 2012/6/27 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > 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 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
