+1 (to showing deprecation in console) On 20/08/2014 17:33, "Carsten Ziegeler" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I think we don't - and for now it would be the factory implementation >doing >the stuff. It would be great to show something in the console. Maybe >through the annotations? > >Carsten > > >2014-08-20 18:26 GMT+02:00 Justin Edelson <[email protected]>: > >> This would be OK with me. Out of curiosity, do we actually have a way >> of deprecating adapter factories? Or would such a warning be the >> responsibility of the adapter factory? Should we add something to the >> web console plugin to indicate that an adaption is deprecated. >> >> Justin >> >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Carsten Ziegeler >><[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Yes, >> > >> > so how do you feel about deprecating it, log a bold message (once) - >>and >> > then maybe remove it in one of the next versions? >> > >> > Regards >> > Carsten >> > >> > >> > 2014-08-20 17:48 GMT+02:00 Justin Edelson <[email protected]>: >> > >> >> Hi Carsten, >> >> I'd rather keep it, but... I don't actually see a good way to fix >> >> SLING-3859, so it might be more expedient to deprecate this. Or at >> >> least log a warning that the ResourceResolver must be manually >>closed. >> >> >> >> Justin >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Carsten Ziegeler < >> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Thanks Justin, >> >> > >> >> > so either we have to fix the memory leak or go without it :) What >>do >> you >> >> > prefer? >> >> > >> >> > Regards >> >> > Carsten >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > 2014-08-20 13:52 GMT+02:00 Justin Edelson >><[email protected]>: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > Hi, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Carsten Ziegeler < >> >> [email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> ...I think this adaption is conceptually wrong and I have no >>idea >> why >> >> >> we added >> >> >> >> this in the first place, so adding this to the memory leak >> problem, I >> >> >> would >> >> >> >> simply remove this thing.... >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It was added by Justin for SLING-2315 - I am ok with deprecating >> and >> >> >> > later removing it, but let's hear Justin. >> >> >> >> >> >> I find this to be of high utility when dealing with legacy code >>which >> >> >> only makes a Node object available. I don't actually know that >>I've >> >> >> ever used the Property adaptatation part, but I definitely use the >> >> >> Node -> Resource adaptation a few times a year. Could I live >>without >> >> >> it? Sure, especially as now that the ResourceResolverFactory code >>is >> >> >> much more complex than it was at the time. >> >> >> >> >> >> Justin >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -Bertrand >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Carsten Ziegeler >> >> > Adobe Research Switzerland >> >> > [email protected] >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Carsten Ziegeler >> > Adobe Research Switzerland >> > [email protected] >> > > > >-- >Carsten Ziegeler >Adobe Research Switzerland >[email protected]
