On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Mark Struberg<[email protected]> wrote:
> Matze,
> I think this would all become ok if _all_ the EE6 parts will simply use the 
> JSR-330 javax.inject.Scope annotation as basis for their scopes.

+1

> This would make at least the classpath scanning part a hell lot easier (the 
> context implementation in the background still needs to be coded for each DI 
> part,
> because there is no API defined for it except in JSR-299).

I agree

>
>
> I already tried to convince Gavin and Pete to at least use @Scope for JSR-299 
> scopes, but they refused so far. I hope that there will be a really well 
> founded _technical_ discussion on this topic in the very near future though!
>

+1 this is all political issues... sucks for the poor developers.

> My 'vision':
>
> *) JSR-330 defines the basic annotations for DI in Java generally
> *) JSR-299 defines the annotations for EE related stuff (@SessionScoped, 
> RequestScoped) BASED ON JSR-330!
> *) JSF2 uses the @SessionScoped from JSR-299. Why should JSF define own 
> annotations? Even if you don't like to use any 299 container, you may still 
> use the annotations defined in the API and provide an own small DI like 
> MyFaces does it right now. Don't know if it makes sense at all to reinvite 
> the wheel 10000 times... ;)
>

Imagine you don't use EJB or anything else from JAvaEE, just JSF (and
a servlet container). A dependency to 299-impl is a little heavy,
right ?

Heck, what we need is clean, simple and extensible injection
"container" in SE land. Which is the base for every damn thing.

-Matthias

>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: WebBeans "eating" JSF 2.0 annotations ?
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 5:45 PM
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Mark
>> Struberg<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > In fact we (OWB) should provide standard context
>> implementations for JSF annotated scopes.
>> >
>> > The whole picture:
>> >
>> > .)  JSF scanns the classpath for JSF annotations
>> >
>> > .) OWB scanns the classpath for JSR-299 annotations
>> >
>> > In fact, I assume (not having looked at the code) that
>> MyFaces provides kind of a mini DI container in the EL code.
>> So any EL which will get through to the faces EL handler
>> will successfully resolve those scoped beans
>> >
>> > Otoh, OWB also provides an EL handler which is
>> dominant (prior in the EL chain). OWB currently simply
>> ignores the javax.faces.scope annotations since they are
>> 'unknown' for OWB. So this very class will look like a bean
>> which has no annotations at all.
>> >
>> >
>> > The problem arises latest if JSF scoped beans need to
>> be injected into JSR-299 beans and vice versa...
>> >
>> > an idea how to resolve this:
>> > We need to provide context implementations for the
>> faces scopes in the webbeans-jsf module and let OWB do all
>> the resolving.
>> >
>> > wdyt?
>>
>> yes, that's true. It is really a PITA to have three
>> different ways to
>> @inject stuff (in JavaEE - well the javax.faces.bean.**
>> stuff is
>> optional)
>>
>> I am pretty sure this will actually cause lot's of pain,
>> trouble and
>> bad blogs on JavaEE 6 (heck, deserved! :-) )
>>
>> Are you able to bring this dilemma up on some EG ?
>> (mismatch of all the stuff)
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>> >> Subject: Re: WebBeans "eating" JSF 2.0 annotations
>> ?
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 5:26 PM
>> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM,
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf<[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Mark
>> Struberg<[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> for what I know (discussion on wb-dev)
>> JSF apps
>> >> should use JSR-299 @ScopeType annotated scopes
>> (renamed to
>> >> @NormalScope in the latest spec) and not faces
>> scopes. I did
>> >> hope that we could unify all scopes by generally
>> using
>> >> JSR-330 javax.inject.Scope in all EE fields. But
>> that will
>> >> not work until JSR-299 also recognizes and treats
>> JSR-330
>> >> scopes as normal scopes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > WTF ? :)
>> >> >
>> >> > It is kinda odd that JSF 2.0 has should use
>> the 299
>> >> stuff. Standalone,
>> >> > ok all fine (not tested).
>> >> > But even if there are both in the game jsf2.0
>> and 299,
>> >> they should
>> >> > just work (or at least I should
>> >> > get a warning that the bean is using a (good)
>> -sorry-
>> >> incorrect... annotation.
>> >> >
>> >> > Basically this is a total mess. Annontations
>> work
>> >> standalone, but not
>> >> > when adding some heavyweight
>> >> > stuff (like 299) to the game ? Oh boy...
>> >>
>> >> I am pretty sure that this will introcude a lot of
>> fun to
>> >> folks
>> >> writing JSF 2.0 applications,
>> >> if your statement is true. That would worse than
>> the JSP
>> >> 2.1
>> >> dependency (with JSF 1.2)
>> >>
>> >> I filed this bug:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-133
>> >>
>> >> At least there should be some help. Not everybody
>> is
>> >> thrilled to
>> >> replace annotations based on
>> >> the environment (at least not me)
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > -Matthias
>> >> >
>> >> >> LieGrue,
>> >> >> strub
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --- On Wed, 8/26/09, Matthias Wessendorf
>> <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]>
>> >> >>> Subject: Re: WebBeans "eating" JSF
>> 2.0
>> >> annotations ?
>> >> >>> To: [email protected]
>> >> >>> Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009,
>> 5:11 PM
>> >> >>> has no effect. The beast can't find
>> >> >>> the JSF beans.
>> >> >>> Due to lack of time, I am going with
>> JSF 2.0
>> >> standalone.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Question is: as it was working the
>> current
>> >> behavior is a
>> >> >>> regression,
>> >> >>> has there been any testing on OBW +
>> JSF 2.0 ?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> -Matthias
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM,
>> Gurkan
>> >> Erdogdu<[email protected]>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> > It must not eat.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > But one point,
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > You still use old XML
>> configuration file
>> >> format. As a
>> >> >>> default OWB uses new
>> >> >>> > XML format. Add
>> >> >>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openwebbeans/trunk/samples/guess/src/main/resources/META-INF/openwebbeans/openwebbeans.properties
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > in your project
>> >> resources/META-INF/openwebbeans folder
>> >> >>> and sure that all
>> >> >>> > libraries are ok.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > You can look necessary libs
>> from
>> >> guess.war . You can
>> >> >>> create it from mvn
>> >> >>> > package -Pjetty.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > --Gurkan
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > 2009/8/26 Matthias Wessendorf
>> <[email protected]>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >> Hi,
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> is it possible that the
>> current trunk
>> >> is _eating_
>> >> >>> JSF 2.0 annotations ?
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> <someCode>
>> >> >>> >> ...
>> >> >>> >> import
>> javax.faces.bean.ManagedBean;
>> >> >>> >> import
>> >> javax.faces.bean.SessionScoped;
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> @ManagedBean(name="playersBean")
>> >> >>> >> @SessionScoped
>> >> >>> >> public class ViewParamsBean
>> >> >>> >> {
>> >> >>> >> ...
>> >> >>> >> </someCode>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> In June (before reflecting
>> the
>> >> >>> javax.enterprise.context changes) it
>> was
>> >> >>> >> working.
>> >> >>> >> Now expressions like
>> #{playersBean}
>> >> are simply
>> >> >>> ignored ;-)
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Demo project is here:
>> >> >>> >> https://facesgoodies.googlecode.com/svn/CGN/trunk/
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> -Matthias
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> --
>> >> >>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> >>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> >>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > --
>> >> >>> > Gurkan Erdogdu
>> >> >>> > http://gurkanerdogdu.blogspot.com
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Matthias Wessendorf
>> >> >
>> >> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>
>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Reply via email to