Yep, I still think it's useful. JLouis
2013/10/1 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > Not particularly > > the thread ends while the feature is useful IMO so simply asking what to do > next ;) > > *Romain Manni-Bucau* > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > > > 2013/10/1 Jason Porter <[email protected]> > > > Was this my action item? > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 7:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > any news on it? > > > > > > @ResultMapper was good to me > > > > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > > > > > > > > > > > 2013/7/12 Jason Porter <[email protected]> > > > > > >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > >> <[email protected]>wrote: > > >> > > >>> Ps: you can make a cdi bean an ejb from cdi extension > > >>> > > >> > > >> No, the bootstrapping for each container do not communicate to my > > >> knowledge. > > >> > > >> > > >>> Le 12 juil. 2013 08:12, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <[email protected]> > a > > >>> écrit : > > >>> > > >>>> Hi > > >>>> > > >>>> Depending the case DTO are not an option. > > >>>> > > >>>> I agree in rest app i wouldnt it but if not possible (maybe through > > >>>> another Bean) it would kill this module for half of the usages i see > > >>> since > > >>>> i'd need to add this layer. > > >>>> Le 12 juil. 2013 06:55, "hantsy" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > >>>> > > >>>>> No DTO please, data module for data access, why we care about DTO. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> A question about the data, the difference for EJB and none EJB > > >>>>> environment. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> if possible in a EJB envoriment, proxy the Repository and add > > >> @Stateless > > >>>>> and transaction declaration to Repository automatically at runtime. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hantsy > > >>>>>> On 7/10/2013 23:23, Thomas Hug wrote: > > >>>>>> I wouldn't label the feature with DTO but rather as some general > > >>> result > > >>>>>> transformation - might also be useful for e.g. native queries. > Going > > >>>>> back > > >>>>>> to the API suggestion, from that perspective such an annotation > > >> should > > >>>>>> probably also work on method level, so I'd keep the forEntity out > > >>> there. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:22 PM, John D. Ament < > > >>> [email protected] > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Personally, I don't like this idea. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> A DAO should do DAO stuff. > > >>>>>>> A DTO should do DTO stuff. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The transformation of your entities into some other POJO > shouldn't > > >> be > > >>>>>>> inside your DAO. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Right now, I use google guava to do DTO work on entities going > back > > >>> and > > >>>>>>> forth over a REST API. Works well IMHO. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> John > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > >>>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> globally my answer meant "if forEntity is sometimes mandatory, > > >>>>> sometimes > > >>>>>>>> not this is maybe not the right place" > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> i thought to add it to mapper config > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > >>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > >>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > >>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > >>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Making forEntity non-optional would then be redundant for the > > >>> regular > > >>>>>>>> cases > > >>>>>>>>> using the base interface, so I wouldn't. But I see that it > should > > >>> be > > >>>>>>>>> clearly documented then as things might get confusing... > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > >>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> do you mean you force forEntity = Person.class? > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> looks ok for me since the only constraint is to add the dto > > >> types > > >>>>>>>>> somewhere > > >>>>>>>>>> :) > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > >>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > >>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > >>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > >>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hmm and I assumed DTOs are dead and buried :-) > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Packing this in the base interface feels kind of clunky to > me - > > >>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>> considering that there are repositories without the need to > > >>> extend > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> base > > >>>>>>>>>>> interface. What about something like > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Repository(forEntity = Person.class) > > >>>>>>>>>>> @ResultMapper(entityMapper = MapperX.class, keyMapper = > > >>>>>>>> MapperY.class) > > >>>>>>>>>>> public interface PersonRepository extends > > >>>>>>> EntityRepository<PersonDto, > > >>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk> { ... } > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Having the Entity on @Repository takes precedence and the > type > > >>>>>>>>> parameters > > >>>>>>>>>>> are in this case just for convenience. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau > > >>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> just to complete this thread the main issue is not the > > >>>>>>>> implementation > > >>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the exposed API: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityRepository<E, PK extends > Serializable> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would become > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityDtoRepository<E, PK extends > > >> Serializable, > > >>>>>>>> Dto, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > >>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello guys, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just used DS Data module yesturday, and I was wondering if > we > > >>>>>>>> could > > >>>>>>>>>>> add a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature allowing on-the-fly conversion to DTO. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we could use modelmapper (or similar to > convert > > >>>>>>> DAO > > >>>>>>>>>> return > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> values to DTO objects). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a mapper interface to delegate to would also allow > > >>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> plug > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> their own implementation in. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> JLouis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/1 Thomas Hug <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi John > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thnx for the message, missed that one. Looks like there's > a > > >>>>>>>>> default > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> profile > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed (test-persistence.xml only part of the specific > > >> server > > >>>>>>>>>>>> profiles). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will check tonight. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:42 AM, John D. Ament < > > >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whoever brought in the data module, can you double check > > >>>>>>> your > > >>>>>>>>>> tests > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license headers? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's just your tests, but it's failing during a > rat > > >>>>>>>>> check > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > https://builds.apache.org/job/DeltaSpike%20RAT-Check/org.apache.deltaspike.modules$deltaspike-data-module-impl/558/testReport/org.apache.deltaspike.data.impl/QueryResultTest/org_apache_deltaspike_data_impl_QueryResultTest/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Louis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Jason Porter > > >> http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp > > >> > > > -- Jean-Louis
