You may have noticed, the very important "annot" point was also "bent"
beyond recognition with other sometimes random topics. Maybe somebody
should simply have created a separate thread or replied elsewhere;-)
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well there are replies to good to know fact that Commons Config is "alive
> and kicking" (based on the project page and recent activity) that should
> not belong to this thread.
>
> @Romain, others please discuss things like stage, etc. it in other
> threads;-)
>
> Thanks,
> Werner
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @werner:
>> we already have important and ongoing discussions in other threads
>> (starting step by step).
>> imo it doesn't make sense to start new threads about "random" topics which
>> will be discussed later on (once they are due).
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-04 16:16 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > there are stages in jsf, deltaspike, spring and several other libs. In
>> > practise a system property is also ofnte used and enough for the
>> > config:
>> >
>> > Configuration.fromPaths("/foo/bar/" +
>> > System.getProperty("myapp.stage", "prod") + "-config.properties);
>> >
>> >
>> > Environment would make sense only when we'll support distribution
>> > which is far to be the case so we can maybe drop it for now.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-12-04 16:11 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>:
>> > > One could merge *Stage *and *Environment*, see Multiconf, but abusing
>> > *Stage
>> > > *to model *Environment *seems rather pointless.
>> > >
>> > > Werner
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> >About stage: we have enough stage outside tje config to use it
>> without
>> > >> What do you mean here, the totally inadequate ProjectStage enum in
>> > JSF?;-)
>> > >>
>> > >> IMHO at least the notion of Environment should be present, otherwise
>> > >> multi-tenancy or "Cloud" support that Java EE keeps babbling about
>> ever
>> > >> since at least EE 7 will remain the same joke and empty phrase in
>> > Tamaya as
>> > >> it does there (or in the PR of most large companies including
>> Oracle;-D)
>> > >>
>> > >> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>> > >> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
>> Advisory
>> > >> Board Member, DWX '15
>> > >>
>> > >> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap
>> |
>> > #EclipseUOMo
>> > >> | #DevOps
>> > >> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> > >>
>> > >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> About stage: we have enough stage outside tje config to use it
>> without
>> > >>> any issue or code to write with [configuration].
>> > >>> About Environment: not a strong requirement in enough cases to not
>> be
>> > >>> present by default.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> We could surely use [configuration] in our impl pretty easily (in a
>> > >>> format/reader depending where we finish)
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >>> @rmannibucau
>> > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 2014-12-04 15:52 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>:
>> > >>> > After a brief but slightly deeper look at Commons Config 2, it
>> could
>> > be
>> > >>> > better separated into API vs. implementations (similar to say
>> Log4J
>> > 2;-)
>> > >>> > and something notably absent is the concept of "Stage" or
>> > >>> "Environment". In
>> > >>> > theory the 2 projects could explore synergies making Tamaya the
>> > "Cloud
>> > >>> > Enabler" for some of the core concepts that look fairly neat in
>> > Commons
>> > >>> > Config 2 (I worked with V1 in a few projects, it was a bit complex
>> > but
>> > >>> > doable)
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > Werner
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Werner Keil <
>> werner.k...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> >> Hi,
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> Probably more important than config subsystems in JSR 107 or
>> Log4J 2
>> > >>> >> (though it altogether got a really good rewrite making any effort
>> > for a
>> > >>> >> "Logging JSR" by some people almost pointless;-) seems a massive
>> > >>> redesign
>> > >>> >> and recent activity of Apache Commons Logging 2:
>> > >>> >>
>> http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-configuration/index.html
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> Anybody had a look at that?
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> Apache certainly has a very multicultural ecosystem, look at
>> Struts
>> > vs.
>> > >>> >> OpenFaces vs. Wicket vs. Tapestry and who knows how many (Web
>> MVC)
>> > >>> projects
>> > >>> >> all exist, so why not have at least 2 or 3 for configuration.
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> Something noteworthy is, that Commons Configuration 2 refrains
>> from
>> > any
>> > >>> >> static factory.
>> > >>> >> Even a class sounding like it was static such as Configurations
>> (in
>> > a
>> > >>> new
>> > >>> >> "fluent" package) works like this:
>> > >>> >> Configurations configurations = new Configurations();
>> > >>> >> PropertiesConfiguration config = configurations.properties(new
>> File(
>> > >>> >> "config.properties"));
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> Werner
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>
>
