@romain:
you will always have same/similar terms in different areas (see e.g.
"message").

regards,
gerhard



2014-02-18 10:08 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>:

> well managedresource looks really like a jmx stuff for me and since it
> uses cdi managed is quite obvious. That's why i thought the project
> name would  fit and make the origin obvious.
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
>
> 2014-02-18 9:51 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>:
> > @romain:
> > maybe not @Managed (it was just @DeltaSpikeManaged without the
> > project-name), but @ManagedResource is at least more expressive than the
> > project-name itself.
> > (that it's managed by ds is clear due to the package-name imo)
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-02-18 9:30 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> @Gerhard: hmm, @Managed neither in fact + the type is expressive,
> >> qualifier is just a namespace IMO
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-02-18 9:26 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >:
> >> > @romain: the point is that it isn't expressive at all...
> >> >
> >> > regards,
> >> > gerhard
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2014-02-18 9:20 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> >> Project name should be fine now, if not all pakcages will change so
> >> >> same impact than annotation name
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-02-18 9:18 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> > I like @DeltaSpike but as gerhard said, maybe it's better to use
> one
> >> >> > without the project name in it? On the other side, DeltaSpike is
> the
> >> >> final
> >> >> > name...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Maybe @ExtensionManaged?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2014-02-18 8:54 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> @Gerhard: loos too much to existing JMX APIs + managed doesn't
> mean
> >> >> >> anything anymore today IMO
> >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2014-02-18 8:32 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> > @thomas:
> >> >> >> > maybe something like @Managed or @ManagedResource
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > regards,
> >> >> >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 2014-02-18 7:17 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> @DeltaSpike?
> >> >> >> >> Le 18 févr. 2014 06:26, "Christian Kaltepoth" <
> >> >> christ...@kaltepoth.de>
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> écrit :
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > @Thomas: I also like the idea of a global qualifier like
> this.
> >> >> That's
> >> >> >> >> > something I was already looking for when I created @Web back
> >> then.
> >> >> But
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > most difficult question is what the name should be.
> >> Unfortunately
> >> >> >> I've no
> >> >> >> >> > really good idea.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > 2014-02-15 15:26 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> >> >> >> >> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > >:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > +1
> >> >> >> >> > > Any ideas about the name gerhard?
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > Any veto about such a change?
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > 2014-02-15 11:29 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> >> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > >:
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > i'm ok with changing it, if we do it for both.
> >> >> >> >> > > > however, we would need a better name (imo without the
> >> >> >> project-name).
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > 2014-02-15 11:24 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> >> >> >> >> > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > > >:
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > I found another case were something like
> >> >> >> >> > > > > @DeltaSpike/@DeltaSpikeManaged/etc. would probably be a
> >> >> better
> >> >> >> >> name:
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > @JsfPhaseListener public class MyPhaseListener
> implements
> >> >> >> >> > > PhaseListener {
> >> >> >> >> > > > > ... }
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > It's the same as with @Web.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > We already know that it's an PhaseListener. So why name
> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > annotation
> >> >> >> >> > > > the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > same again?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > We also already know that a HttpServletRequest is
> >> something
> >> >> from
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > Web...
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > 2014-01-07 17:44 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <
> >> >> >> >> > > > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > In the CDI 1.1 specs (3.7), there are only following
> >> beans
> >> >> >> >> defined:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > HttpServletRequest
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > HttpSession
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ServletContext
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > So if you are in a CDI 1.1 environment, it might be
> >> >> confusing
> >> >> >> >> > because
> >> >> >> >> > > > > some
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > artifacts are available without @Web and some only
> with
> >> >> @Web.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > I will open a vote about it because i can't see a
> >> reason to
> >> >> >> keep
> >> >> >> >> > @Web
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > > 2014/1/5 Karl Kildén <karl.kil...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> This is my summary:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> By following the discussion it seems to be seen as
> >> >> >> convenient vs
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> inconvenient and the vote is kinda even. What I
> would
> >> >> like to
> >> >> >> >> see
> >> >> >> >> > is
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> cohesion in Deltaspike overall. Either you use
> >> namespaces
> >> >> or
> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> > > > don't.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > My
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> point is basically that it feels more like a
> >> project-wide
> >> >> >> >> > decision.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> To summarize, when a spec or w/e is expected to
> >> introduce
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> same
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> producer
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> different strategies can be used. So either the
> >> strategy
> >> >> as a
> >> >> >> >> user
> >> >> >> >> > > is
> >> >> >> >> > > > to
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> a)
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> use the namespace and drop it when someone else
> >> provides
> >> >> it
> >> >> >> >> (i.e a
> >> >> >> >> > > > spec)
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> or
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> b) Trust Deltaspike to handle any conflicts.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> pros:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - No conflicts or conflict management.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - Users can use both variants for example if
> Deltaspike
> >> >> >> offers
> >> >> >> >> > > extras.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> Apparently already true for Servlet Module.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - Abolishes the idea of transparent replacement with
> >> the
> >> >> >> >> argument
> >> >> >> >> > > that
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> various enhancements might make it incompatible
> >> anyways.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> cons:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - Must remove namespace when Deltaspike is
> >> superfluous. No
> >> >> >> >> > namespace
> >> >> >> >> > > > and
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> automatic veto would make it more seamless.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - More verbose and not as pretty to use.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> - Does not see incompatibly as a big problem.
> Reasoning
> >> >> is:
> >> >> >>  End
> >> >> >> >> > > user
> >> >> >> >> > > > > must
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> test application behavior after upgrade anyway and
> >> >> problems
> >> >> >> >> should
> >> >> >> >> > > be
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> minor.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> Btw i'm +0
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> On 4 January 2014 17:09, Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> >> > > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > to summarize it:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > so far we haven't seen a real blocker for dropping
> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > qualifier.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > 2014/1/4 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > never said it was blocking, just it shouldn't be
> >> done
> >> >> >> >> blindly
> >> >> >> >> > > and
> >> >> >> >> > > > > docs
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > should be very explicit on it and potential
> >> conflict
> >> >> >> >> (usually
> >> >> >> >> > we
> >> >> >> >> > > > > don't
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > care to not mention we don't use a qualifier,
> here
> >> we
> >> >> >> do).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > 2014/1/4 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > it was just one of several possibilities you
> >> have.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > in any case, the special case you mentioned is
> >> still
> >> >> >> easy
> >> >> >> >> > > enough
> >> >> >> >> > > > > ->
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > there
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > is no issue/blocker imo.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > 2014/1/4 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> so didnt get your comment on decorators...
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> LinkedIn:
> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> 2014/1/4 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> > @romain:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> > you should do the wrapping like you would
> do
> >> it
> >> >> >> without
> >> >> >> >> > cdi
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> anyway.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> > 2014/1/4 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> @gerhard: @Decorator is broken in 85% of
> the
> >> >> case
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> > > > doesn't
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> work
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> with producers IIRC
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> LinkedIn:
> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> 2014/1/4 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > @romain:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > you can use e.g. @Decorator in such
> special
> >> >> >> cases or
> >> >> >> >> > > just
> >> >> >> >> > > > do
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> wrapping
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > like you would without cdi.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> > 2014/1/4 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> yes and no, depend what you do of it,
> the
> >> >> point
> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> if
> >> >> >> >> > > you
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> base
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > your
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> app on CDI (as much as possible I mean)
> >> and
> >> >> it
> >> >> >> >> starts
> >> >> >> >> > > to
> >> >> >> >> > > > be
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > common,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> you can put logic in these producers,
> >> >> typically
> >> >> >> >> > > wrapping
> >> >> >> >> > > > of
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> requests/responses (can be easier than
> >> using
> >> >> >> >> filters)
> >> >> >> >> > > and
> >> >> >> >> > > > > in
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > this
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> case
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> this is often not 1-1 replacement. I
> know
> >> it
> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> > doable
> >> >> >> >> > > > but
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> needs
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> update the app and can break "big apps"
> >> where
> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> > > > aggregate
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > multiple
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> parts.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Having a namespace should be a best
> >> practise
> >> >> >> IMHO.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Blog:
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> LinkedIn:
> >> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> 2014/1/4 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> >> > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > @romain:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > i don't see an issue here - if you
> add
> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> ds-servlet-module,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > you
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> just
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> drop
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > your own producers (which overlap and
> >> >> should
> >> >> >> do
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > same
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > anyway).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > 2014/1/4 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >> >> >> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> well in fact I saw a lot of cdi 1.0
> app
> >> >> >> >> producing
> >> >> >> >> > > > http*
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > objects
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> without qualifier cause it was
> missing
> >> in
> >> >> >> cdi so
> >> >> >> >> > > > > conflicts
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > can
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> occurs
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> and are quite common
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> Blog:
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> LinkedIn:
> >> >> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> Github:
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> 2014/1/4 Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> >> > > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > > >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > we had no qualifier for
> FacesContext
> >> (in
> >> >> >> codi,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> seam3,...).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> since it
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> used
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > be a common producer, we saw
> >> >> "compatibility
> >> >> >> >> > > issues".
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > however, with a proper
> documentation
> >> >> (how
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> >> > veto
> >> >> >> >> > > > one
> >> >> >> >> > > > > of
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > them),
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> no
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> user
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > (i'm aware of) had a real issue
> with
> >> it
> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> >> > > the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > majority
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > it
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> was
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> easier
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > to use (because there wasn't an
> >> issue at
> >> >> >> all).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> > 2014/1/4 Mark Struberg <
> >> >> strub...@yahoo.de>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> The question for me is: are there
> >> >> already
> >> >> >> >> known
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> producers
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > for
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> it
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> or
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> there any spec which introduces
> >> this?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> In that case a custom qualifier
> is
> >> >> always
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> > good
> >> >> >> >> > > > idea
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> imo.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> Otherwise
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> we
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> would face different behaviour on
> >> >> >> different
> >> >> >> >> > > > > containers.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > They
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> most
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> times
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> behave different...
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> I just would like to avoid
> possible
> >> >> >> >> > > > > incompatibilities.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> And
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > for
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> this a
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> Qualifier certainly works great -
> >> >> without
> >> >> >> >> much
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> additional
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> complexity.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> Does all the needed detection +
> veto
> >> >> >> really
> >> >> >> >> pay
> >> >> >> >> > > > off?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> How
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > do
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > you
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> know
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> are running in an environment
> which
> >> >> >> already
> >> >> >> >> has
> >> >> >> >> > > > such
> >> >> >> >> > > > > a
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > producer
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> registered?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> This is not easy to accomplish!
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> Thus I'm for keeping it.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> LieGrue,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> strub
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >________________________________
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> > From: Gerhard Petracek <
> >> >> >> >> > > > gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >Sent: Saturday, 4 January 2014,
> >> 12:57
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >Subject: Re: Servlet Module -
> Do we
> >> >> >> really
> >> >> >> >> > need
> >> >> >> >> > > > > @Web?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >+1 for a veto in case of cdi
> 1.1.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >@external producers:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >we can document it (how users
> can
> >> veto
> >> >> >> e.g.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> producers, if
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > they
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> see
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> any
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >overlap).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >however, deltaspike shouldn't
> add
> >> >> >> complexity
> >> >> >> >> > > just
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> because
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> there
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> might
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> be a
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >custom producer (for the same).
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >gerhard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >2014/1/4 Christian Kaltepoth <
> >> >> >> >> > > > > christ...@kaltepoth.de>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> @John: Actually the Servlet
> >> module
> >> >> >> >> provides
> >> >> >> >> > > more
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> than
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > what
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> CDI
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> 1.1
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> adds.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> For example the event
> propagation
> >> >> and
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > recently
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > added
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> "WebStorage"
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> the resource loading and so
> on.
> >> So
> >> >> >> people
> >> >> >> >> > may
> >> >> >> >> > > > want
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> to
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > add
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> Servlet
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> module even in a CDI 1.1
> >> container.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm also +0 for that. Of
> cause it
> >> >> >> would be
> >> >> >> >> > > nice
> >> >> >> >> > > > to
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> get
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > rid
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> of
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> @Web.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> For
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> CDI 1.1 case we could actually
> >> veto
> >> >> our
> >> >> >> >> > > produces
> >> >> >> >> > > > > as
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Thomas
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> suggested.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> But
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> what about other portable
> >> extensions
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> > may
> >> >> >> >> > > > have
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > producers
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> for
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> @Default.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Say I'm using CDI 1.0 and also
> >> have
> >> >> >> Solder
> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> > > > the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> classpath. I
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> think
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> Solder
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> is still a common dependency
> of
> >> some
> >> >> >> >> > > libraries,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > correct?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > In
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> some
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> regard
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> it
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> is nice to have a custom
> >> "namespace"
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> producers.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> 2014/1/3 Thomas Andraschko <
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > Because our customers have
> >> >> different
> >> >> >> >> > servers
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> (tomcat7
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > and
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> even
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> 6,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > glassfish, jboss), so it
> would
> >> be
> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> great
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> enhancement
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > for
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> product
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > development.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > 2014/1/3 John D. Ament <
> >> >> >> >> > > > john.d.am...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > If you're in servlet
> 3.1/CDI
> >> 1.1
> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> > don't
> >> >> >> >> > > > > even
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > need
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> servlet
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > module (so why include it
> as
> >> a
> >> >> >> >> > > dependency?)
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at
> 1:09
> >> PM,
> >> >> >> Romain
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -0 both injections can
> be
> >> >> >> different
> >> >> >> >> > > > > depending
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> on
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> containers
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> using
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> some
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > advanced stuff out of ee
> >> but
> >> >> >> >> affecting
> >> >> >> >> > > ee
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > lifecycle
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> (at
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> least
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > tomcat)
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > but your proposal sounds
> >> >> >> acceptable.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Le 3 janv. 2014 17:58,
> >> "Thomas
> >> >> >> >> > > > Andraschko" <
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com
> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > a
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > écrit :
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> Hi,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> IMHO @Web is somehow
> >> >> annoying.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> HttpServlet e.g. is
> always
> >> >> >> "web",
> >> >> >> >> so
> >> >> >> >> > > @Web
> >> >> >> >> > > > > is
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > just
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > a
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> overhead
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > doesn't
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> look nice.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> Can't we just veto the
> >> >> >> producers if
> >> >> >> >> > > > CDI1.1
> >> >> >> >> > > > > is
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> available?
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> The code would be the
> same
> >> >> with
> >> >> >> CDI
> >> >> >> >> > > 1.0 +
> >> >> >> >> > > > > DS,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > CDI
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > 1.1
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> without
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> or
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> with
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > DS.
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> Regards,
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >> Thomas
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Christian Kaltepoth
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Blog:
> http://blog.kaltepoth.de/
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Twitter:
> >> http://twitter.com/chkal
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> GitHub:
> https://github.com/chkal
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> > Christian Kaltepoth
> >> >> >> >> > Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/
> >> >> >> >> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
> >> >> >> >> > GitHub: https://github.com/chkal
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>

Reply via email to