OK. For now, let's leave the logging as the responsibilty of the factory and add an adapter.deprecated service registration property for the console to pick up.
Justin On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:33 PM, 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]
