+1 for a spi with a default detection at boot time Le 25 nov. 2017 19:56, "John D. Ament" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> Hi Rüdiger! > > I think it would be fine if it could operate without MP Config. I was > actually thinking that configuration could be more of an SPI, rather than a > hard requirement. E.g. one impl for MP Config, another for ConfigJSR, and > maybe a default one with system properties enabled? > > And you are correct, that was my strawman placeholder to solve it, but > agree that it will not work 100% > > If you want to create a pull request, first fork https://github.com/ > apache/geronimo-safeguard then make your changes in your fork. You > should then see an option in github to raise a PR. > > John > > On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 1:03 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey guys >> >> Should Safeguard run even without a MP-Config implementation? I think it >> would be cool if it did. >> >> Method `ExecutionPlanFactory#enableNonFallbacksForMicroProfile` looks a >> little bit like it tries to, but line 141 catches only >> `ClassNotFoundException`. If it would also catch `NoClassDefFoundError` and >> `ExceptionInInitializerError`, it would actually work. >> >> I could create a pull request, but I can't see how? >> >> >> Rüdiger >> >> BTW: On http://geronimo.apache.org/GMOxPMGT/contributor-process.html >> there's a broken link to the mailing lists. It's falsely ` >> http://geronimo.apache.org/mailing.html` >> <http://geronimo.apache.org/mailing.html>, but it should be ` >> http://geronimo.apache.org/mailing-lists.html` >> <http://geronimo.apache.org/mailing-lists.html>. I don't have rights for >> the wiki. >> >>
