Hello, Worked quite a bit on the site today. For example I added some docs on the api jars and added a lot of links. Reworked wording and referencing. I only linked to the new api jars because I do believe that these are backwards compatible right? Assuming you only use "old" features. I do believe what we have now is fine to get started but I will gladly work on it some more if you have any feedback.
For example of my work hard refresh these: http://openwebbeans.apache.org/owbsetup_ee.html http://openwebbeans.apache.org/download.html For samples I referred to our samples in the source (with link to github as well) And I also linked to TomEE docs for CDI. I was thinking that I should work on the FAQ next or should I do more work at the samples page? On 19 April 2015 at 23:28, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Heh, yes, I’m also using direct svn commits to make my changes ;) > Afterwards I use the CMS ui to review and publish the changes. > > > If that is OK then I can look at the site tomorrow already because I > > actually need better owb docs for my day job since we are switching > project > > after project to it > > That would be perfect! > Feel free to ping me whenever you need help! > > Re DS-style. Yes, Switching all to asciidoc would be an option as well. > I don’t think we have _that_ many stuff into our md. So we could easily go > the same route. > Just need to transform all to asciidoc. > > > Regarding the proposed code changes. Anything newbie friendly? :) > I think the Session stuff is not that heavy. > Probably we could set up pairs and hacking via shared hangout screen to > spread the work. > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > Am 19.04.2015 um 23:14 schrieb Karl Kildén <[email protected]>: > > > > Regarding fixing the site. I know I said I would fix the docs but the cms > > holds me back to much because I really dislike it. I was thinking the > other > > day that it might be a lot easier for me to work with subversion directly > > instead and create a patch from it? > > > > and I explain it over and over anyways. I booked myself > > up until lunch tomorrow and I will be on irc trying to get this going > > again. I would be really glad if we could have something easier for docs > > like github or confluence or something but I understand fully that it's > not > > so easy. > > > > Also kind of interested in the deltaspike style... And I am also a bit > > interested in merging the CDI based information with the TomEE project a > > bit? > > > > Regarding the proposed code changes. Anything newbie friendly? :) > > > > cheers > > > > > > On 19 April 2015 at 22:40, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> well the good point of FO is that you have a flush at the end so > >> potentially a single remote touch. Not sure what's the usage, I know in > >> TomEE it is never used. > >> > >> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber > >> <http://www.tomitribe.com> > >> > >> 2015-04-19 22:08 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > >> > >>> The point is that our default impl will still have a Map backed > >>> SessionContext. But that one also doesn’t need any serialisation! > >>> > >>> The HttpSession will be a part of the webbeans-web module where it fits > >>> with the WebContextsService. > >>> The headache with the whole FailOver stuff is imo in no relation to the > >>> eventual benefits. > >>> > >>> LieGrue, > >>> strub > >>> > >>>> Am 19.04.2015 um 21:51 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < > >> [email protected] > >>>> : > >>>> > >>>> 2015-04-19 21:25 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi folks! > >>>>> > >>>>> First I want to say a BIG thanks to all the people wo made OWB-1.5.0 > >>>>> possible. It was quite a long walk, but we had tons of fun and the > >>> project, > >>>>> the team and the community around it ist still amazing even after so > >>> many > >>>>> years! > >>>>> > >>>>> There is an old saying: „After the release is before the release“ > >>>>> > >>>>> I guess we will likely get some bugs and feedback pretty soon, so I > >>> target > >>>>> a 1.5.1 release rather soonish ;) > >>>>> > >>>>> What do YOU like to address in the next few weeks? > >>>>> Here is my personal list of tasks: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Update our site to reflect CDI-1.1. ANY HELP IS WELCOME :) > >>>>> > >>>>> * Get rid of our Map backed SessionContext impl. Instead we should > >> store > >>>>> our @SessionScoped beans directly in the HttpSession. And only use a > >>> Map if > >>>>> we really need a ’synthetic session’. We also don’t need to care > about > >>>>> sessionId rewrite anymore in that case. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> +0.7. Basically I think it is a super good feature to not depend on > the > >>>> session impl so we need to keep it even if agree it shouldnt be the > >>>> default. FYI tomee has it > >>>> > >>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/tomee/blob/develop/tomee/tomee-catalina/src/main/java/org/apache/tomee/catalina/cdi/SessionContextBackedByHttpSession.java > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> * Store our Conversations in a custom Bean<T> in the SessionContext. > >>> That > >>>>> way it doesn’t matter where the session gets stored. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> +1, also wonder if it makes sense to have ConversationBean request > >>> scoped. > >>>> Makes transient conversation hard to manage and dependent of a scope > it > >>>> shouldnt need IMO. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> * Probably get rid of the ConversationManager? It uses the nifty > >>> sessionId > >>>>> heavily :( And technically we don’t need that… > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> * Get rid of all the FailOver stuff. This is not needed anymore if we > >>>>> really persist into a Session. This will really simplify a big area > of > >>> our > >>>>> codebase > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> +0.7. Makes sense but also far better than session storage depending > >> the > >>>> session impl used. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> * Split WebBeansConfigurationListener in Begin and End Listeners. We > >> did > >>>>> this in TomEE already. This is important if to guarantee that OWB > gets > >>>>> started as first in the chain, but stopped/cleaning up as last one in > >>> the > >>>>> Listener chain. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> Also makes harder in servlet apps and not very useful. Can makes sense > >> in > >>>> tomcat integration but I'd keep an aggregated listener for common > cases > >>> of > >>>> OWB user usage. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> * Improve our Servlet integration. > >>>>> > >>>>> I will create JIRA tickets for all thos ideas. > >>>>> > >>>>> Wdyt? Any other things to target in the next release? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> LieGrue, > >>>>> strub > >>> > >>> > >> > >
