Will wait a few hours and plan to merge it in beginning of the afternoon on master if nobody voices against
Thanks for your feedback guys Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le mer. 5 déc. 2018 à 09:06, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> a écrit : > +1 to create our own stuff. > > I would be more than happy to help on this one ! > > Regards > JB > > On 03/12/2018 15:24, Romain Manni-Bucau 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 <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > < > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > > > > > > > Le jeu. 22 nov. 2018 à 11:57, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected] > > <mailto:[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 <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > < > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > [email protected] > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
