great! thx jakob & mark!

+1!

regards,
gerhard

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



2011/7/11 Jakob Korherr <[email protected]>

> Hi,
>
> > right - there are no entries in the manifest. they will be generated for
> the separated osgi bundle/s during the build (based on the build config).
>
> Jep! That was the idea in the first place (look at the branch and
> you'll see no bundle plugin in myfaces-api or myfaces-impl, but in
> myfaces-bundle).
>
> @Leo: From my point of view, the branch is complete. In addition, Mark
> committed my patch for MJAVADOC-320, thus the javadoc generation does
> already work too (if you use the latest 2.8.1-SNAPSHOT of the
> javadoc-plugin).
>
> Here is a short summary of the proposed changes:
>
> - remove felix bundle plugin executions from myfaces-api and
> myfaces-impl (we have myfaces-bundle for OSGi).
> - use maven-shade-plugin with package relocation (shared to
> shared_impl) in myfaces-impl instead of
>  a) ant-task to rename source from shared to shared_impl
> (myfaces-shared-impl project)
>  b) dependency plugin to unpack shared-impl-sources.jar in
> myfaces-impl and build-helper-plugin to add these sources as a new
> source folder
> - use maven-javadoc-plugin with includeSourceDependencies=true for
> shared (and impl-ee6) in order to include the javadocs of shared in
> the myfaces-impl javadocs
>
> These changes have the following implications:
>
> - all imports of myfaces-shared code in myfaces-impl will go to
> org.apache.myfaces.shared.* instead of
> org.apache.myfaces.shared_impl.*, because relocation is done on
> class-file-basis instead of source-file-basis.
> - myfaces-shared-core will be a direct dependency of myfaces-impl at
> development time, thus enabling hot-deployments,... when changing
> stuff in shared at development time.
> - myfaces-shared-impl project will be obsolete (b/c - as already
> mentioned - myfaces-impl uses shared-core instead of shared-impl).
>
>
> If there are no objections, I will merge in the changes from the branch
> soon!
>
> Regards,
> Jakob
>
> 2011/7/8 Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>:
> > Hi Gerhard
> >
> > Ok, now that part has sense.
> >
> > There are still some things to check before apply the change. Please
> > let me know when all code is on the branch and I'll do a final in-deep
> > check.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Leonardo Uribe
> >
> > 2011/7/8 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> >> hi leo,
> >> right - there are no entries in the manifest. they will be generated for
> the
> >> separated osgi bundle/s during the build (based on the build config).
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >> http://www.irian.at
> >>
> >> Your JSF powerhouse -
> >> JSF Consulting, Development and
> >> Courses in English and German
> >>
> >> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2011/7/8 Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> Ok, I agree it is not a problem, but if that so, shouldn't we remove
> >>> OSGi entries on the manifests in myfaces-api and impl jars? just to
> >>> prevent possible confusions about that.
> >>>
> >>> regards,
> >>>
> >>> Leonardo Uribe
> >>>
> >>> 2011/7/8 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> >>> > +1!
> >>> > regards,
> >>> > gerhard
> >>> >
> >>> > http://www.irian.at
> >>> >
> >>> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >>> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >>> > Courses in English and German
> >>> >
> >>> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > 2011/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Leo, SpringDM does much more work usually to tweak something for
> their
> >>> >> needs!
> >>> >> They can just use the myfaces-bundle.jar as each and every other
> OSGi
> >>> >> user
> >>> >> does too.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> What I meant was more: we shall _not_ do something ugly just to make
> >>> >> OSGi
> >>> >> happy ^^
> >>> >>
> >>> >> So using the maven-shade-plugin is perfectly fine and will be a big
> >>> >> benefit for cleaning up the shared project!
> >>> >>
> >>> >> LieGrue,
> >>> >> strub
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --- On Fri, 7/8/11, Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > From: Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > Subject: Re: Use maven-shade-plugin to prevent duplicate code -
> >>> >> > revisited
> >>> >> > To: "MyFaces Development" <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > Date: Friday, July 8, 2011, 3:20 PM
> >>> >> > Hi
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I don't think the OSGi mention is off-topic. In theory it
> >>> >> > is possible
> >>> >> > to setup myfaces-api and myfaces-impl jars in a OSGi
> >>> >> > container using
> >>> >> > SpringDM. The changes proposed just prevents that possible
> >>> >> > setup to
> >>> >> > work, but that one was the first known successful
> >>> >> > environment to use.
> >>> >> > Note in this case the are no problems with FactoryFinder,
> >>> >> > because
> >>> >> > Spring DM provide a thread context classloader (TCCL) that
> >>> >> > fix that.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > The changes proposed impose the restriction that anyone who
> >>> >> > wants to
> >>> >> > use OSGi should use myfaces-bundle jar instead. But from
> >>> >> > other point
> >>> >> > of view it is clear that in such environment users could
> >>> >> > want to use
> >>> >> > mojarra api and myfaces impl, even if that is not really
> >>> >> > possible.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Note the previous arguments are questionable of course,
> >>> >> > because in
> >>> >> > practice people will use myfaces-bundle jar, keeping things
> >>> >> > simple
> >>> >> > because you have to deal only with one bundle. So it does
> >>> >> > not suppose
> >>> >> > a problem, just a "side effect" to keep in mind.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I think it is required to specify in more details which are
> >>> >> > the "side
> >>> >> > effects" of the changes proposed. Note on a previous mail i
> >>> >> > said "...
> >>> >> > I haven't look the code provided in deep ...", but I guess
> >>> >> > the patch
> >>> >> > proposed will prevent @JSFWebConfigParam annotations to be
> >>> >> > scanned for
> >>> >> > myfaces builder plugin and consequently break this
> >>> >> > generated site
> >>> >> > page:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > http://myfaces.apache.org/core20/myfaces-impl/webconfig.html
> >>> >> > http://myfaces.apache.org/core21/myfaces-impl/webconfig.html
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I don't see very clear the "benefits" of the change. I
> >>> >> > suppose it
> >>> >> > enhance debugging in some way, but is that true? can I do a
> >>> >> > change on
> >>> >> > shared, and do not have to recompile to see the change? If
> >>> >> > I set a
> >>> >> > break point on shared-core, the debugger will stop there? I
> >>> >> > would like
> >>> >> > to see a strong (and maybe heavier and tedious but
> >>> >> > necessary)
> >>> >> > argumentation before do the change.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > regards,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Leonardo Uribe
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > 2011/7/8 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> >>> >> > > hi mark,
> >>> >> > > that's a bit off-topic ;) we already (have to) provide
> >>> >> > osgi bundles. we just
> >>> >> > > continue to do the same with the shade-plugin.
> >>> >> > > regards,
> >>> >> > > gerhard
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > http://www.irian.at
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> >>> >> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> >>> >> > > Courses in English and German
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > 2011/7/8 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> Hi folks!
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> There are 2 problems with JSF under OSGi
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> a) OSGi is in reality a _big_ mess and not really
> >>> >> > worth the troubles ;)
> >>> >> > >> It _should_ make it possible to elegantly switch
> >>> >> > implementations, but in
> >>> >> > >> practice you need to import/export all packages
> >>> >> > explicitly, even those which
> >>> >> > >> are only used indirectly.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> b) the design of the JSF-api could be more clear
> >>> >> > with separation (hey,
> >>> >> > >> it's 10 years old!). It is not possible to use a
> >>> >> > MyFaces-impl with a
> >>> >> > >> mojarra-api and vice versa, because methods like
> >>> >> > >> FacesContext#getCurrentInstance() (and similar)
> >>> >> > access impl classes from the
> >>> >> > >> API package. This makes it pretty hard to work
> >>> >> > OSGi.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> LieGrue,
> >>> >> > >> strub
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> --- On Fri, 7/8/11, Jakob Korherr <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > From: Jakob Korherr <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > >> > Subject: Re: Use maven-shade-plugin to
> >>> >> > prevent duplicate code -
> >>> >> > >> > revisited
> >>> >> > >> > To: "MyFaces Development" <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > >> > Date: Friday, July 8, 2011, 1:09 PM
> >>> >> > >> > Hi Leo,
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > Yes, I remember that you did some work
> >>> >> > related to this
> >>> >> > >> > stuff. Some
> >>> >> > >> > comments about your problems:
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > 1) If you use myfaces-impl, the packages
> >>> >> > really are
> >>> >> > >> > *.shared_impl.*
> >>> >> > >> > (shade does the relocation on the classes).
> >>> >> > But a part of
> >>> >> > >> > this
> >>> >> > >> > statement is still true - we need to check
> >>> >> > config files
> >>> >> > >> > with
> >>> >> > >> > references to shared and shared_impl.
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > 2) That's not true. We solved this problem in
> >>> >> > CODI, as
> >>> >> > >> > described.
> >>> >> > >> > Please take a look at the code ;)
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > 3) We don't need to execute felix bundle
> >>> >> > plugin directly
> >>> >> > >> > in
> >>> >> > >> > myfaces-impl, b/c it won't work in an OSGi
> >>> >> > environment
> >>> >> > >> > anyway (see
> >>> >> > >> > e.g. FactoryFinder problems). We have
> >>> >> > myfaces-bundle for
> >>> >> > >> > this matter!
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > Regards,
> >>> >> > >> > Jakob
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > 2011/7/7 Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>:
> >>> >> > >> > > Hi
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > I haven't look the code provided in
> >>> >> > deep, but long
> >>> >> > >> > time ago I tried
> >>> >> > >> > > it. In that time I saw the following
> >>> >> > problems:
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > 1. There are some classes on shared that
> >>> >> > are used
> >>> >> > >> > outside it. For
> >>> >> > >> > > example, see
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > org.apache.myfaces.shared.webapp.webxml.DelegatedFacesServlet.
> >>> >> > >> > > We need to detect all similar cases and
> >>> >> > move those
> >>> >> > >> > classes to
> >>> >> > >> > > myfaces-impl, but renaming shared with
> >>> >> > shared-impl, or
> >>> >> > >> > just create
> >>> >> > >> > > classes that extends from the ones in
> >>> >> > shared, to
> >>> >> > >> > preserve backward
> >>> >> > >> > > behavior. In theory, the affected
> >>> >> > packages are:
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> >  org.apache.myfaces.shared_impl.webapp.webxml
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> >  org.apache.myfaces.shared_impl.taglib
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> >  org.apache.myfaces.shared_impl.taglib.core
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > 2. Generated artifacts (-sources.jar,
> >>> >> > -javadoc.jar)
> >>> >> > >> > has problems. It
> >>> >> > >> > > is clear javadoc and source jars will
> >>> >> > not have
> >>> >> > >> > shared-impl.
> >>> >> > >> > > 3. shade plugin and felix maven bundle
> >>> >> > plugin does not
> >>> >> > >> > play well. By
> >>> >> > >> > > default bundle plugin is executed before
> >>> >> > shade plugin,
> >>> >> > >> > but what you
> >>> >> > >> > > want is the opposite, so the information
> >>> >> > on
> >>> >> > >> > MANIFEST.MF could be
> >>> >> > >> > > generated taking into account all
> >>> >> > classes. Note if we
> >>> >> > >> > solve 1, this
> >>> >> > >> > > should not be a problem, because classes
> >>> >> > inside shared
> >>> >> > >> > are myfaces
> >>> >> > >> > > internals (remember why spi interfaces
> >>> >> > are on impl
> >>> >> > >> > package and not in
> >>> >> > >> > > shared).
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > I'll keep an eye on the resulting work.
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > regards,
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > Leonardo Uribe
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> > > 2011/7/7 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> >>> >> > >> > >> hi jakob,
> >>> >> > >> > >> great - thx!
> >>> >> > >> > >> regards,
> >>> >> > >> > >> gerhard
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >> http://www.irian.at
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >> Your JSF powerhouse -
> >>> >> > >> > >> JSF Consulting, Development and
> >>> >> > >> > >> Courses in English and German
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >> Professional Support for Apache
> >>> >> > MyFaces
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >> 2011/7/7 Jakob Korherr <[email protected]>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> Hi guys,
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> I committed a working draft to
> >>> >> > the branch at
> >>> >> > >> > [1]. However, there are
> >>> >> > >> > >>> some issues with the
> >>> >> > javadoc-plugin (see [2])
> >>> >> > >> > that must be fixed first
> >>> >> > >> > >>> in order to get the expected
> >>> >> > javadoc. The
> >>> >> > >> > other stuff (shading of
> >>> >> > >> > >>> shared and impl-ee6) already
> >>> >> > works as
> >>> >> > >> > expected!
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> Feel free to try it out
> >>> >> > yourself. Comments and
> >>> >> > >> > suggestions are welcome!
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> Regards,
> >>> >> > >> > >>> Jakob
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> [1]
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/branches/2.0.8_shade_prototype/
> >>> >> > >> > >>> [2] https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MJAVADOC-320
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> 2011/7/7 Werner Punz <[email protected]>:
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > Excellent news ++1, the
> >>> >> > shared as we have
> >>> >> > >> > it is a bad design decision I
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > hope
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > shade will get rid of our
> >>> >> > debugging
> >>> >> > >> > issues we have with our current
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > shared.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > Werner
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> > Am 07.07.11 11:04, schrieb
> >>> >> > Jakob
> >>> >> > >> > Korherr:
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> Hi Gerhard,
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> Thx for (re-)opening
> >>> >> > this thread. I
> >>> >> > >> > already created a jira issue [1]
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> and a core-branch [2]
> >>> >> > for
> >>> >> > >> > prototyping.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> Currently I am
> >>> >> > struggling a little
> >>> >> > >> > bit with the javadoc-plugin, but
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> this stuff should be
> >>> >> > fixed soon
> >>> >> > >> > (maybe even today).
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> I'll let you guys know
> >>> >> > when I am done
> >>> >> > >> > with the configuration, so that
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> you can try it out
> >>> >> > yourselves!
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> Regards,
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> Jakob
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-3205
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> [2]
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/myfaces/core/branches/2.0.8_shade_prototype/
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >> 2011/7/7 Gerhard
> >>> >> > Petracek<[email protected]>:
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> hi @ all,
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> the goal (as we
> >>> >> > discussed before)
> >>> >> > >> > is to get rid of the shared-impl
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> module
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> and move to the
> >>> >> > shade-plugin for
> >>> >> > >> > maven.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> issues with javadoc
> >>> >> > and osgi
> >>> >> > >> > bundles prevented us from doing this
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> step.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> however, with codi
> >>> >> > v1 we have a
> >>> >> > >> > project(-configuration) which fixes
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> all
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> the
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> issues we had with
> >>> >> > the
> >>> >> > >> > shade-plugin.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> ->  imo we can
> >>> >> > (and should)
> >>> >> > >> > use it also for myfaces-core.
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> regards,
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>> gerhard
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>> >
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> --
> >>> >> > >> > >>> Jakob Korherr
> >>> >> > >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >> > >>> blog: http://www.jakobk.com
> >>> >> > >> > >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr
> >>> >> > >> > >>> work: http://www.irian.at
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >>
> >>> >> > >> > >
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > --
> >>> >> > >> > Jakob Korherr
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >> > blog: http://www.jakobk.com
> >>> >> > >> > twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr
> >>> >> > >> > work: http://www.irian.at
> >>> >> > >> >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jakob Korherr
>
> blog: http://www.jakobk.com
> twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr
> work: http://www.irian.at
>

Reply via email to