I took a look at the test and the commit, to remember why this would fail. The test fails because the property isn't set. This is actually a MP Config requirement, validating injection points. If I add System.setProperty(SOME_KEY, "no-op"); to the beginning of the deployment method, it works as expected. See [1] for the API requirements
Now that test continues to fail on Weld3 with this change in, seemingly the custom provider doesn't work. Are you using Weld or OWB as your runtime? [1]: https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-config/blob/1.0/api/src/main/java/org/eclipse/microprofile/config/inject/ConfigProperty.java#L50 On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:27 PM Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > I have now tried to use this version in a project and totally blew up. > I reviewed the code in depth and I'm not sure how to fix it except with a > revert of some committs. > > So I gonna change my vote to -1 > > The reason seems to be r1800744 which imo introduced uneccessary > complexity and broke quite a few features. > > e.g. injection of Provider is now broken. > It also breaks programmatic lookup, etc. > > How to proceed? > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > Am 01.08.2017 um 21:54 schrieb Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > > > And my own +1 of course. > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > >> Am 01.08.2017 um 11:16 schrieb Reinhard Sandtner < > [email protected]>: > >> > >> +1 (non-binding) > >> > >> lg > >> reini > >> > >>> Am 30.07.2017 um 12:16 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>: > >>> > >>> +1 (non binding) > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> On Jul 30, 2017, at 12:04, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> +1 > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> Le ven. 28 juil. 2017 à 13:20, Romain Manni-Bucau < > [email protected]> a écrit : > >>> +1 (for the release and the src zip in dist) > >>> > >>> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau > >>> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory > >>> > >>> 2017-07-28 14:17 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > >>> Yes we should make sure this gets propagated to dist! > >>> > >>> LieGrue, > >>> strub > >>> > >>>> Am 28.07.2017 um 13:58 schrieb John D. Ament <[email protected]>: > >>>> > >>>> +1 to ship it. > >>>> > >>>> One comment, there's been input in the past that geronimo releases > don't show up in the system. Should we ensure that the final result gets > put into https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/geronimo/ ? > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 7:25 AM Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> Hi! > >>>> > >>>> Apache geronimo-config is an implementation of the Microprofile-1.0 > Config specification [1][2]. > >>>> > >>>> It allows flexible and extensible Configuration for applications. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Here is our staging repo > >>>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1035/ > >>>> > >>>> The Source distribution can be found here: > >>>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1035/org/apache/geronimo/config/config-parent/1.0/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Our own tag in SVN is > >>>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/components/config/tags/config-parent-1.0/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Please VOTE > >>>> [+1] yeah, ship it! > >>>> [+0] meh, don't care > >>>> [-1] nope, because ${showstopper} > >>>> > >>>> The VOTE is open for 72h > >>>> > >>>> txs and LieGrue, > >>>> strub > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-config > >>>> [2] https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-config/releases > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > >
