Github user aledsage commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/brooklyn-server/pull/137
@alasdairhodge can you rebase this please so we can see if all the tests
pass?
I'm still not sure about us calling `deferredSupplier.get()` inside coerce.
I have a couple of big worries. First that it might have unanticipated
side-effects for other code (e.g. code that is supposed to be non-blocking
might now block). And second that it is only doing a small part of what
`ValueResolver` does (e.g. handle `DeferredSupplier`, `Task`, `Future`, and
deep inspection to resolve values inside maps, lists, etc).
The second point means that it might work in certain use-cases and then
break in other use-cases. If we want the value to really be resolved, then
perhaps we should go through the same code path as the existing
`config().get(key)`, but with the type being passed in rather than being
obtained from the type defined in the `ConfigKey`.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
