should be fine in core if it respects the way DS modules are done = they can be switched by config
- Romain 2012/7/9 Antoine Sabot-Durand <[email protected]> > +1 I agree with Pete on this but we should pay attention to Candi > compatibility. Seam config crashes with Caucho Candi which already has its > own xml config solution. Having introduced it in JBoss Solder made Seam 3 > incompatible with Resin. > > I agree that core is a good place for xml config as long as we check that > it won't make Deltaspike unusable with Resin. > > > > Antoine > > Le 7 juil. 2012 à 12:33, Pete Muir a écrit : > > > +1 to adding it from me. > > > > XML config is probably the feature (as opposed to enhancement to > existing feature or "bug" fix) most requested for CDI. I think we need > something like this in DeltaSpike, in order to fulfil our goals. > > > > A non compiled format such as XML (or YAML or ...) makes a lot of sense > for *configuration* of an application (as opposed to wiring [1]), > > > > As Jason said, this is the only known XML config (dialect and impl) for > CDI, so I think it's quite uncontroversial. The "API" of the config is > actually the XML dialect, which has received a lot of attention in the past > (designed for CDI 1.0, so fully reviewed by the EG). > > > > BTW I'm not understanding why putting it in a separate module makes a > difference? It's dependencies are basically zero (CDI API and SAX, which is > in the JDK), and I think if it goes in it's own package, it shouldn't cause > contention on class files. Personally, I think this is a core concern, and > as it doesn't introduce dependencies can go easily into the core. > > > > On 6 Jul 2012, at 21:14, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > > >> +0 since i'm not sure XML is really CDI spirit...and it needs to be > >> consistent with already existing config (global alternatives etc) which > can > >> be a bit complicated > >> > >> - Romain > >> > >> > >> 2012/7/6 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > >> > >>> i'm not sure if we should start with it for v0.4, however, if it gets > an > >>> own (optional) module: +0 > >>> > >>> regards, > >>> gerhard > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> 2012/7/6 Jason Porter <[email protected]> > >>> > >>>> It's been a 10 on our list for awhile but we haven't done it yet. > >>> Thoughts > >>>> on adding it to v0.4? It would be a straight port from what we have in > >>> Seam > >>>> 3 with package name changes. It's currently the only implementation in > >>>> existence (that we know of) of the older xml config that was to be > part > >>> of > >>>> spec but was later pulled. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > > > >
