We can do that if it helps. Or we can simply focus on the api module only and discuss what cocerns are there. Build use cases on top of that. The api currently is quite small ( i further reduced it yesterday).
The main topics to be discussed will not disappear: 1) how, also dtatically (se!) access configuration? 2) is there one config or are there multiple ones? If multiple, how they are identified? 3) how to add type safety? For me a required api festure, but lets discuss... 4) how to provide extensibiliy (in java 8 clearly with functional interfaces)? 5) how to provide configuration (spi) currently modelled as PropertySource, similar to Deltaspike. I can tonight also remove write support from the api. Coding of the last days has shown that it must be modelled separately. Its only rarely used, and just adding it by default make things much complicated. Given that the pnly api left would contain: - configuration - property adapter (functional interface) - configQuery (funct.interface) - propertysource - annotations (tbd, we could move them also to an injection module separately) Spi - configurationspi - servicecontext stuff Wdyt? Anatole Tresch <[email protected]> schrieb am Mi., 24. Dez. 2014 um 12:45: > Hi Romain/all > > Just to clarify: All formats are already part of the core implementation. > The api even has no abstraction for formats. In the api its all about > PropertySource and Configuration, plus functional interfaces to hook in > code for use cases, not more... > > Anatole > Anatole Tresch <[email protected]> schrieb am Mi., 24. Dez. 2014 um > 11:22: > > Hi Mark >> >> sorry, but I actually overlooked that mail, when you first wrote it, so I >> will answer it now ;) >> >> *Size Comparison, *you stated: >> >> > 1.) DeltaSpike >> > The whole configuration system consists of 5 classes with in summary >> 800 lines of code (including license headers, tons of javadoc, etc). >> > >> > 2.) Tamaya >> > 123 classes with 7500 lines of code >> >> Despite the fact that Tamaya is much smaller in size the comparison IMO >> is completely invliad the ways you did it, beacuse: >> - Deltaspike config relies on CDI, which does context management, >> injection, provides extension and injection SPI, all used by the overall >> code. Tamaya has to do that kind of things on its own, because it cannot >> and should not rely on CDI. For a correct comparison you should add up the >> code e.g. from Weld on top and - bingo - Tamaya would be much smaller. >> - When we would compare filtes and other stuff, I am quite sure, Tamaya >> will be not bigger in many cases. If you like, we can do that kind of >> comparison, I would love to face that challenge... ;) >> >> *Use Case:* >> >> From your description I suggest there are two ways to solve that >> >> 1) The caller that reads the configuration is managing the filter. >> 2) The filter is built in implicitly by some framework configuration that >> provides it along the configuration definition (metamodel). >> >> And here's the code (assuming String MyPKI.decrypt(String) provides >> the required decryption : >> >> *1) * >> URL endPoint = Configuration.current().get("endPointURL", >> URL.class).get(); >> String uid = Configuration.current().get("endPointURL.user").get(); >> String pwd = Configuration.current().*getAdapted("endPointURL.password", >> (v) -> MyPKI.decrypt(v)};* >> ** >> >> *2) In this case the SPI implementation that provides the correct >> configuration adds the filter:* >> >> ConfigurationBuilder.of().addPaths(...)*.filterValues((k,v) -> >> k.equals("endPointURL.password")?MyPKI.decrypt(v):v)*.build(); >> >> The API part then is completely transparent: >> >> URL endPoint = Configuration.current().get("endPointURL", >> URL.class).get(); >> String uid = Configuration.current().get("endPointURL.user").get(); >> String pwd = Configuration.current().get("endPointURL.password").get(); >> >> Adding a filter to the current classloader could be added as a feature as >> well, but is not the case. Especially classloaders are only one of possible >> isolation strategies. If we want to add that kind of future to Tamaya as >> well, it would be something like: >> >> Configuration.current().addFilter( >> (k,v) -> k.equals("endPointURL.password")?MyPKI.decrypt(v):v) >> ; >> >> Cheers, >> Anatole >> >> >> - >> Anatole Tresch >> Glärnischweg 10 >> 8620 Wetzikon >> Tel +41 (43) 317 05 30 >> - >> Send from Mobile >> >> > Am 22.12.2014 um 17:36 schrieb Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: >> > >> > Hi! >> > >> > I have a very fundamental problem with the current state of Tamaya. It >> grows and grows and grows and grows. But what for? What are the key >> benefits of all those classes? >> > >> > I bet I don't see all the details, so please lets get a discussion >> started. >> > >> > >> > As a simple start I just like to compare 2 known mechanisms: >> > >> > 1.) DeltaSpike >> > The whole configuration system consists of 5 classes with in summary >> 800 lines of code (including license headers, tons of javadoc, etc). >> > >> > >> > 2.) Tamaya >> > 123 classes with 7500 lines of code >> > >> > >> > So as you can see there is a HUGE difference in complexity. And to be >> honest I cannot see much justification yet. >> > >> > >> > >> > Even if you add the ProjectStage (3 classes, 500 LOC) and the full CDI >> integration (4 classes, 400 LOC) to DeltaSpikes configuration (features >> Tamaya don't yet have) then you are still way below Tamaya. But even with >> way more functionality. >> > To be honest, I was reading through JavaDocs and sources and so far it >> was by far more WTFs than aha. >> > >> > >> > >> > Of course I most probably miss some features, so please help me to find >> those gaps and fill them. >> > I'd like to suggest that we start a small game and collect use cases >> and how those might get solved with Tamaya and with DeltaSpike-config. >> > >> > >> > In general we have to abstract 4 different aspects: >> > >> > 1.) the API/SPI >> > 2.) the server provided functionality >> > 3.) a user way to customize/extend the configuration functionality >> > 4.) the user way to read the configured values >> > >> > >> > I'll give you an example of a use case: >> > >> > >> >> A company uses REST endpoints and need to talk to those. >> > So we need to configure a few things: >> > 1.) the endpoint URL >> > 2.) the username which should be used to connect (e.g. over https, >> BASIC auth, whatever) >> > 3.) the passphrase which should be used to connect. >> > >> > The security credentials (passphrase) should not get stored in >> plaintext but encrypted using PKI. It should of course also not get logged >> out in clear text but shall get masked if logging out the configured values >> is enabled. >> > >> > >> > In DeltaSpike I'd just register a ConfigFilter to do the password >> decoding on the fly. So this is pretty much straight forward. How is this >> handled in Tamaya? >> > >> > >> > Now it's your turn: give me some use case where you think the current >> tamaya source is strong. And then we gonna discuss it. If something is not >> needed or easily solvable otherwise then we gonna drop those parts which >> are superfluous. NOW is the time to do such things! If all features and >> sources turn out to be there for a good reason than I'm happy to keep them. >> If there is no VERY GOOD reason, then it will get cut out. Not sure about >> the others around here, but I personally am a really big fan of KISS (Keep >> It Simple and Stupid) when it comes to such fundamental (in the sense of >> important fundament and foundation) pieces. >> > >> > >> > txs and LieGrue, >> > strub >> >
