+1 to brew our own. Yes Bruno is right that the jodah.failsafe is obviously more battle tested. But by relying on an almost dormant external lib we loose the ability to quickly fix bugs and add improvements ourselves. And tbh safeguard is really not that a complex matter.
LieGrue, Strub Sent with autocorrect... > On 03.12.2018, at 15:24, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello guys, > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=geronimo-safeguard.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/api-cdi-tck-refactoring > is now ready and I'd like to move it forward and merge it as our new master. > Here is the proposal > > 1. branch current master in 1.0.x - just to keep the code somewhere > 2. merge the branch on master (1.1-SNAPSHOT would likely become > 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT at the same time) > > I'll be "off" next week so if we can make it this week it is awesome > otherwise I can probably do it the week of the 17th and do a Xmas release > with other implementations. > > Let me know if there is any issue about that plan and it needs some > adjustments. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book > > >> Le jeu. 22 nov. 2018 à 11:57, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> a >> écrit : >> There are several discussions about safeguard so i'd like we try to get a >> dedicated thread about it and see how we move forward this lib. >> >> Personally I'd like to align it on the way other impls are done which >> concretely means: >> >> 1. drop failsafe >> 2. probably drop the API module which mainly adds builders and definition >> models to make it part of the implementation and stick to the spec in terms >> of exposed API >> 3. merge tck module in the implementation module >> 4. probably make FailsafeExecutionManager a cdi bean (we can keep it usable >> programmatically if needed too, this is not one or the other) to let the >> nested components be injected and overridable one by one instead of having >> to override them all >> 5. try to respect CDI model and not use reflections in interceptors (drop >> AnnotationUtil), this is likely the hardest since the spec does not enables >> it directly but we did with quite some success in other specs >> >> I did a quick check and once 2 is done the effort for 1 is very doable and >> 3/4 are quite trivial >> >> Wdyt? >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
