On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 08:41, Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Norbert, > > Indeed, annotations should be harmless. We can start with option (1) > having xwiki-component-api as a provided dependency until I find a way > to register the component roles at runtime.
You can find in many unit tests how to do it, actually even the init components are registered at runtime. See ComponenetManager#registerComponenent. Annotations and component manager are two different things: at startup XWiki components are loaded and given to ComponenetManager with a plain ComponentDescriptor generated from the annotations. But you still need to list them somewhere since you cant search for all classes implementing some interface in the classpath. (which is why we have component.txt files) > > Thanks, > Marius > > Norbert Sándor wrote: >> I don't know anything about the "xwiki component" infrastructure, but as >> an external user I would prefer (2). >> >> Anyway, here are some thoughts if you choose (1): >> >>> Keep the annotations and thus the dependency. >> >> If they are really only annotations then theoretically they would not >> cause problems. >> When something is marked with an annotation which is unknown at runtime, >> the JRE should ignore the unknown annotation. >> (There were some related bugs in the early JRE5 versions but I think >> they are all fixed now - eg. >> http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6322301 .) >> >> If I'm right then the GWT compiler handles this as well, so unknown >> annotations are simply ignored during compilation. >> (A related - already fixed - issue is >> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=1830 but I >> think there were many in the early GWT-1.5 days :). >> >> So the "xwiki component annotations" can be declared as a "provided" >> dependency, and a project can decide to include or not to include them >> as real compile/runtime dependency. >> >> (The m2eclipse plugin may have problems with this approach because it >> adds "provided" dependencies to the build path as well. But I think this >> would not affect end-users, only the developers of rta-editor. I will >> explain it further if you need.) >> >> Regards: >> Norbi >> >> >> 2010.01.31. 20:31 keltezéssel, Marius Dumitru Florea írta: >>> Hi devs, >>> >>> I'd like to split the wysiwyg module in two: >>> >>> xwiki-gwt-editor : All the client side except the editor initialization >>> code. This module should depend only on xwiki-gwt-dom and >>> xwiki-gwt-user. As a consequence, anyone should be able to inherit this >>> module and reuse the editor outside XWiki. All the editor plugins are >>> included but we don't enforce their use. This means that external >>> parties can assemble whichever plugins they want and only those plugins >>> will be compiled into JavaScript. Some plugins use services. External >>> parties have to implement this services if they want to use the plugin. >>> >>> xwiki-gwt-editor-xwiki : XWiki-specific client initialization code plus >>> all the server side (i.e. the XWiki implementation of plugin services). >>> This module will depend on xwiki-gwt-editor and XWiki platform. >>> >>> All this is quite easy to do, except one thing. Plugin services are >>> treated as components by XWiki which means service interfaces have to be >>> annotated as component roles. This adds a dependency on >>> xwiki-component-api to xwiki-gwt-editor. I see two options: >>> >>> (1) Keep the annotations and thus the dependency. This requires no >>> effort but will make the editor less reusable for those who want to >>> implement the services in a different way, using a different component >>> manager for instance. >>> >>> (2) Remove the component role annotations and add some code to >>> xwiki-gwt-editor-xwiki that dynamically registers as component roles at >>> XWiki startup all the interfaces extending RemoteService (all GWT >>> services must extend this interface). I'm not sure this is possible >>> because components defined in components.txt are looked up earlier. >>> Vincent, WDYT? >>> >>> We can improve later the organization and maybe split xwiki-gwt-editor >>> in multiple modules, but for now this is the quickest way to make the >>> editor reusable. I'm ready to do the split as soon as we agree on the >>> details. WDYT? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Marius >>> _______________________________________________ >>> devs mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >>> >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2659 - Release Date: 01/31/10 >>> 07:39:00 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
