Hmm deprecating is pushing it later imo Le 14 févr. 2014 19:47, "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> I'm fine with that approach. I was thinking we could provide a shaded > jar under the old coordinates and old package, perhaps even with a > warning in the log that you should not be using this. > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > It seems that the inertia of users already relying on cdiCtrl is the > > stickiest point. Why not complete the move and continue to publish a > > deprecated version under the existing coordinates and packaging, with the > > warning that users should be ready to switch by 1.0 or perhaps 1.1? This > > would be simple to accomplish with Maven. > > > > $0.02 in the interest of peace, > > Matt > > On Feb 14, 2014 10:41 AM, "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> I guess I'm kind of curious why this is such a polarized issue. > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Thomas Andraschko > >> <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > +1 for changing the name and location BEFORE 1.0 > >> > > >> > Otherwise it will probably not happen... > >> > > >> > > >> > 2014-02-14 15:04 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek < > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com > >> >: > >> > > >> >> +1 for changing the name and location of cdictrl > >> >> > >> >> regards, > >> >> gerhard > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2014-02-14 13:27 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com > >: > >> >> > >> >> > +0 for position > >> >> > -1 for name or maven coordinates > >> >> > Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > 2014-02-14 13:21 GMT+01:00 <it-media.k...@daimler.com>: > >> >> > > Seems this way. I think this whole dicussion is becoming > ridicuolus. > >> >> > Change it to comply with the rest. I personally never understood > why > >> this > >> >> > very lonely 'module' cdiCtrl is located elsewhere, regardless on > >> whether > >> >> it > >> >> > has different dependencies or not. Additionally it does not fit > into > >> the > >> >> > naming scheme used otherwise. It's a version 0.6 and regardless of > how > >> >> > often it is used, the name change can be reflected on the website > and > >> we > >> >> > are dealing with developers here. They are most likely capable of > >> >> changing > >> >> > an artifact's name, don't you think? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > So for a vote: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > +1 for changing it's name. > >> >> > > +1 for changing it's position. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > My two cents, > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Heiko > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > >> >> > >> Von: John D. Ament [mailto:john.d.am...@gmail.com] > >> >> > >> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 12:28 > >> >> > >> An: deltaspike > >> >> > >> Betreff: Re: Revisit cdiCtrl module name and how it's > inconsistent > >> >> with > >> >> > test- > >> >> > >> control? > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> So, we're voting on starting a vote at this point as to whether > or > >> not > >> >> > we can > >> >> > >> change a JAR's name pre 1.0? > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> > that's the main point of the discussion I think. We are > >> consistent > >> >> > >> > with what we said but users can't wait for years so we are too > >> used > >> >> to > >> >> > >> > maintain it. > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > +1 for a vote > >> >> > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> >> > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> >> > >> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > 2014-02-14 11:33 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek > >> >> > >> <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >> we would need a vote about your statement, because it changes > >> our > >> >> > >> >> official statement. > >> >> > >> >> if the majority agrees, we have to postpone such discussions > >> (e.g. > >> >> > >> >> until v2). > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> a lot of users are still waiting for v1 before they start > with > >> >> > deltaspike. > >> >> > >> >> -> we are late, but according to our official statement we > are > >> >> still > >> >> > >> >> -> in the > >> >> > >> >> pre v1 mode/phase. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> regards, > >> >> > >> >> gerhard > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2014-02-14 10:49 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> that's not true at all, depend the virality of the code. > >> CdiCtrl > >> >> and > >> >> > >> >>> core are viral now. So either we say users to not use DS > before > >> >> 0.1 > >> >> > >> >>> or we keep stability on used modules. Honestly I don't > think we > >> >> have > >> >> > >> >>> the choice if we want to promote what we propose. We are > late > >> for > >> >> a > >> >> > >> >>> 1.0 so already too much used so we have 1.0 constraints > >> already. > >> >> > >> >>> Only new modules don't have them. > >> >> > >> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> >> > >> >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> 2014-02-14 10:46 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek > >> >> > >> <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >>> > imo the definition should be simple: if it depends on > >> >> > >> >>> > deltaspike-core, > >> >> > >> >>> it's > >> >> > >> >>> > a module > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > @romain: > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > again: > >> >> > >> >>> >> there is no issue with api-/name-/... changes >before< > v1. > >> we > >> >> had > >> >> > >> >>> >> a > >> >> > >> >>> > similar change in codi (before v1) and there was no issue > >> with > >> >> it. > >> >> > >> >>> >> (+ we emphasized the possibility of such changes from the > >> very > >> >> > >> >>> beginning). > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > regards, > >> >> > >> >>> > gerhard > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> > 2014-02-14 10:08 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> well I don't agree on modules hierarchy which looks > >> >> inconsistent > >> >> > >> >>> >> but I dont really care while code is here but I agree > with > >> Mark > >> >> > >> >>> >> names are already used 'in fact it is true for this and > for > >> >> core) > >> >> > >> >>> >> so we shouldn't change it anymore. > >> >> > >> >>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> >> > >> >>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> 2014-02-14 9:38 GMT+01:00 Karl Kildén < > >> karl.kil...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >>> >> > As far as I understand , it would be more symmetric > from > >> the > >> >> > >> >>> >> > outside / overview but technically asymmetric because > the > >> >> > >> >>> >> > dependencies are > >> >> > >> >>> >> different. > >> >> > >> >>> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> > But the name change feels harmless and would bring > >> balance to > >> >> > >> >>> >> > the > >> >> > >> >>> force. > >> >> > >> >>> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> > On 14 February 2014 09:31, Thomas Andraschko < > >> >> > >> >>> >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> IMHO there is no difference between our modules and > >> cdictrl. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> However, we should rename it to something like > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> "container-control" to > >> >> > >> >>> >> match > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> our other project names. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> 2014-02-14 8:55 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg > >> >> > >> <strub...@yahoo.de>: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > I'm still -1 (veto) because I'm not convinced that > it > >> has > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > ANY > >> >> > >> >>> benefit. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > The issue is that CdiCtrl as a whole has NOTHING to > do > >> >> with > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > our > >> >> > >> >>> real > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > 'modules'. They do not share even a single import, > do > >> not > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > even > >> >> > >> >>> have a > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > dependency to ds-core. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > How would you explain a fresh user who is looking at > >> our > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > code that > >> >> > >> >>> all > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> the > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > parent pom dependencies do not get used only in this > >> very > >> >> > >> project? > >> >> > >> >>> >> How do > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > you prevent other people from adding dependencies > >> >> randomly? > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > It also has a different build lifecycle basically. > >> >> Actually > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > it's > >> >> > >> >>> >> really > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > more a project part on it's own than just a module > for > >> >> > ds-core. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > I'm a bit undecided about the test-control. It needs > >> >> CdiCtrl > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > _and_ ds-core. But it's also essentially not a ds > >> module > >> >> > neither. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > LieGrue, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > strub > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > On Monday, 10 February 2014, 13:23, Gerhard > Petracek < > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > +1 there is no issue with api-/name-/... changes > >> >before< > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > +v1. we > >> >> > >> >>> had a > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >similar change in codi (before v1) and there was no > >> issue > >> >> > with > >> >> > >> it. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >(+ we emphasized the possibility of such changes > from > >> the > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >very > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> beginning). > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >if we change something like that, we should also > >> re-visit > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >the security-module (the initial reason for > creating > >> an > >> >> own > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >module > >> >> > >> >>> isn't > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> there > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >any longer). > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >regards, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >gerhard > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >2014-02-10 13:17 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko < > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> Can't we change the parent? > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> IMHO renaming isn't a problem if we do it BEFORE > >> 1.0. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> 2014-02-10 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg > >> >> > >> <strub...@yahoo.de>: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > We could rename the module, but I'd rather not > >> move > >> >> it > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > under > >> >> > >> >>> >> modules > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > because they don't have the same parent. And we > >> also > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > must not > >> >> > >> >>> >> change > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > the > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > artifactId as cdictrl is already heavily used > in > >> >> > projects. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > LieGrue, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > strub > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > On Monday, 10 February 2014, 13:05, Thomas > >> >> > >> Andraschko < > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > +1 for renaming to container-controler and both > >> under > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > +modules > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >2014-02-10 12:28 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament < > >> >> > >> >>> >> john.d.am...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> -1 for cdi unit (name already in use for the > >> exact > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> same > >> >> > >> >>> >> purpose) > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> +1 for renaming cdictrl to container-control > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> +1 for aligning both under modules (even > though > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> +cdictrl > >> >> > >> >>> has no > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > deps on > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> core, making it a module makes it easier to > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> understand > >> >> > >> >>> from a > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > user's > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> point of view). > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> Personally, since it's an upgrade of the > >> version # > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> people > >> >> > >> >>> just > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > need to > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> be aware of it when doing the upgrade > locally > >> in > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> their > >> >> > >> >>> >> projects > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > (e.g. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> we can put some notes out there on what > needs > >> to > >> >> be > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> done to > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > upgrade). > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Romain > Manni- > >> >> > >> Bucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > test-control could be renamed cdi-unit or > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > something like > >> >> > >> >>> it > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> IMHO > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > LinkedIn: > >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > 2014-02-10 11:28 GMT+01:00 Gerhard > Petracek < > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> i wouldn't move test-control, since it's > a > >> >> module > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> based > >> >> > >> >>> on > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> deltaspike-core. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> (cdictrl isn't based on deltaspike-core.) > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> regards, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> gerhard > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> 2014-02-10 11:15 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg > < > >> >> > >> >>> >> strub...@yahoo.de>: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> Well, cdictrl is released already. Thus > I > >> >> would > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> rather > >> >> > >> >>> not > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > change > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > it's > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> name. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> test-control is not yet released. So > that > >> >> would > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> be > >> >> > >> >>> easier > >> >> > >> >>> >> to > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> change. > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> LieGrue, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> strub > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> On Sunday, 9 February 2014, 20:16, Karl > >> >> Kildén < > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > karl.kil...@gmail.com> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> Hello, > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >I know it's been discussed before but > now > >> >> with > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >a > >> >> > >> >>> module > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> called > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> test-control > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >it just feel unnecessary to be > >> inconsistent > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >even > >> >> > >> >>> though > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > cdiCtrl > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> is > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> not a > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >module it's not so pretty... > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> >Cheers / Karl > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> > >> >> > > > >> >> > > If you are not the addressee, please inform us immediately that > you > >> >> have > >> >> > received this e-mail by mistake, and delete it. We thank you for > your > >> >> > support. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >
