Oh thanks for this info. So this problem is not only Aries related but might be 
happening in other valid scenarios too.

So we should think about a general solution.

LieGrue,
strub

--- On Fri, 6/3/11, Arne Limburg <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]>
> Subject: AW: Yet another proxy/weaving problem
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Date: Friday, June 3, 2011, 7:47 AM
> Hi,
> 
> we had the same problem with Cobertura. And configured it
> not to weave our Decorators which, of course, resulted in a
> lost of test-coverage information of our Decorators. Gurkan,
> how can the SPI module be used to circumvent the problem?
> 
> I wonder, if the @Typed-Annotation could be used on
> Decorators to circumvent the problem or if one could write
> an extension that listens to the ProcessAnnotatedType event
> and remove the specific interface from the result of
> getTypeClosure(). Does OWB use this information or is
> reflection done to determine the implemented interfaces?
> I'll have a look at the code...
> 
> Regards,
> Arne
> 
> --
> 
> Arne Limburg - Enterprise Developer
> open knowledge GmbH, Oldenburg
> Bismarckstraße 13, 26122 Oldenburg
> Mobil: +49 (0) 151 108 22 942
> Tel: +49 (0) 441 - 4082-0
> Fax: +49 (0) 441 - 4082-111
> [email protected]
> http://www.openknowledge.de
> 
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht Oldenburg, HRB 4670
> Geschäftsführer: Lars Röwekamp, Jens Schumann
> ________________________________________
> Von: Gurkan Erdogdu [[email protected]]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Juni 2011 09:37
> An: [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: Yet another proxy/weaving problem
> 
> >>>another day another problem....
> Integration is always hard thing :)
> 
> >>>but this is going to involve making the list of
> ignored interfaces configurable
> >>>and may not be acceptable to OWB.
> David, this is an acceptable. Explains why SPI module is
> there.
> 
> 
> --Gurkan
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: David Jencks <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected];
> Geronimo Dev List (JIRA)
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Fri, June 3, 2011 9:53:20 AM
> Subject: Yet another proxy/weaving problem
> 
> another day another problem....
> 
> org.apache.webbeans.exception.WebBeansConfigurationException:
> Decorator :
> Name:null, WebBeans Type:DECORATOR, API
> Types:[org.jboss.jsr299.tck.tests.context.dependent.InteriorDecorator,org.apache.aries.proxy.weaving.WovenProxy,org.jboss.jsr299.tck.tests.context.dependent.Interior,java.lang.Object],
> 
> Qualifiers:[javax.enterprise.inject.Any,javax.enterprise.inject.Default]
> delegate attribute must implement all of the decorator
> decorated types, but
> decorator type interface
> org.apache.aries.proxy.weaving.WovenProxy is not
> assignable from delegate type of interface
> org.jboss.jsr299.tck.tests.context.dependent.Interior
> 
> 
> I believe the story here is that decorator classes must not
> implement interfaces
> that the delegate doesn't implement, but aries is adding
> the
> org.apache.aries.proxy.weaving.WovenProxy to the decorator
> class.
> 
> OWB is already excluding Serializable and I can modify the
> code to also exclude
> org.apache.aries.proxy.weaving.WovenProxy and the jcdi
> tests pass but this is
> going to involve making the list of ignored interfaces
> configurable and may not
> be acceptable to OWB.
> 
> Is there any way to make the weaving/proxying code not add
> this interface?  I
> don't think the jdk proxying code needs to add
> interfaces....
> 
> thanks
> david jencks
>

Reply via email to