My work schedule is a bit off the wall at the moment. Just got home (12:45AM), and got to be back at 09:30...
I had a quick look before, but can't recall any particular doubt/concerns, so I suggest go ahead and we solve it after the fact since nothing will break. Niclas On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Paul Merlin <[email protected]> wrote: > Niclas, > > I have some free cycles to work on finishing QI-364 but I'd like to have > feedback on the first activation refactoring I did on > MemoryEntityStoreService and JdbmEntityStoreService before going down on all > librairies and extensions. > > Could you make a quick review of the two commits I mentionned and tell me > what you think? > > Thanks! > > /Paul > > > Paul Merlin a écrit : > >> Niclas Hedhman a écrit : >>>> >>>> I did not remove the Activatable interface yet because that imply a lot >>>> of tedious changes in libraries, extensions, tools and samples. >>> >>> >>> Yes, this will actually present some major challenge. >>> >>> foreach( Library p ) >>> - Write unit test to capture Activatable functionality. >>> - Remove Activatable. >>> - Unit test should fail. >>> - Introduce the activator replacement >>> - Unit test should succeed. >>> >>> This will take a lot of time. But the nice upside a strengthening of >>> the unittests in libraries, which at the moment is a bit weak. >> >> The Activators mechanism handle Types activation in a predictible order, >> but do not handle Mixins activation. That's because, and we already knew >> that, Types order are guaranted but not Mixins order. This indeed prevent >> private mixins activation and means that the @Activators annotation can be >> added on Types only.Another side effect is that you can't use the same >> activation method names on different mixins. >> >> Much more restrictive than legacy Activatable support but strict and >> predictible. >> >> So we'd have to refactor all code that rely on Mixins activation and there >> is a lot. As a first example let's take entitystore-jdbm. >> >> JdbmEntityStoreMixin has activation and passivation needs. >> JSONMapEntityStoreMixin too. >> JSONMapEntityStoreMixin use @This MapEntityStore implemented by >> JdbmEntityStoreMixin. >> >> For now I can't see how to proceed without adding a lot of other types >> related to activation. In the end we won't be able to easily reuse a mixin >> that has activation needs without a correct type (an interface with the >> @Activators annotation). >> >> So, more verbose too. >> >> >> To support the discussion, here is a first commit that removes the >> Activatable interface from MemoryEntityStoreService: >> >> >> https://github.com/Qi4j/qi4j-sdk/commit/e501048736d0dd81fda1a530fff0ae0b3917044e >> >> >> And another one that does the same thing on JdbmEntityStoreService: >> >> >> https://github.com/Qi4j/qi4j-sdk/commit/001814e5f3eb5751c6de1a23574f21b87bba50dc >> >> Note that JdbmEntityStoreService extends JdbmEntityStoreActivation >> _and_ JSONMapEntityStoreActivation. >> >> >> WDYT ? >> >> /Paul >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> qi4j-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev > > _______________________________________________ > qi4j-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/6a2pl4j I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
