regards,
>>> >> gerhard
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> 2013/6/6 Adrian Gonzalez
>>> >>
>>> >> > Hi,
>>> >> > Orchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
>
gt;> regards,
> >> >> gerhard
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2013/6/6 Adrian Gonzalez
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> > Orchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
t;> 2013/6/6 Adrian Gonzalez
>> >>
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> > Orchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
>> >> > DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
>> >> > equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
>
gt; 2013/6/6 Adrian Gonzalez
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> > Orchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
> >> > DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
> >> > equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
> >
gt; Orchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
>> > DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
>> > equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
>> >
>> > ----- Mail original -
>> > De : Gerhard Petracek
>>
en workflow).
> > > > DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
> > > > equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
> > > >
> > > > - Mail original -
> > > > De : Gerhard Petracek
> > > > À : dev@deltaspike
rchestra doc refers to conversation / dialog (even workflow).
> > > DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
> > > equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
> > >
> > > - Mail original -----
> > > De : Gerhard Petracek
> >
coped ;) )
> >
> > - Mail original -
> > De : Gerhard Petracek
> > À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> > Cc :
> > Envoyé le : Jeudi 6 juin 2013 15h21
> > Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
> >
> > #1 imo those names don't fit at all.
> >
gt; DialogScoped would appear to me to be a fine proposition (at least
> equivalent to ConversationScoped ;) )
>
> - Mail original -
> De : Gerhard Petracek
> À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> Cc :
> Envoyé le : Jeudi 6 juin 2013 15h21
> Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
#1 imo those names don't fit at all.
#2 starting the scope explicitly is against the initial idea (please have a
look at [1] and even [2] as well as any other std. scope) and it's an
important (+ intended) difference.
regards,
gerhard
[1] ht
+1 that WizardScope is a not a good name as this scope is used in
other use cases than Wizard-like flows
"WindowConversationScope" ? as it is a "Conversation" inside a
"Window" scope which the CDI ConversationScope is less "specific"
2013/6/6 Gerhard Petracek :
> @ #1: users use it e.g. also for
@ #1: users use it e.g. also for whole sub-sections and/or use-cases of an
application -> it doesn't fit imo
@ #2: is reserved (see jsf 2.2+)
regards,
gerhard
2013/6/6 hantsy
> WizardScoped or FlowScoped
>
> On 6/6/2013 20:56, titou10 titou10 wrote:
> > DialogScope ?
> > FlowScope ? (Possible
UltraScope ;-)
Quoting hantsy :
WizardScoped or FlowScoped
On 6/6/2013 20:56, titou10 titou10 wrote:
DialogScope ?
FlowScope ? (Possible confusion with JSF 2.2 ?)
ExtendedConversationScope ?
CustomConversationScope ?
ConversationCustomScope ?
ConversationExtendedScope ?
ExtendedScope ?
DSConv
WizardScoped or FlowScoped
On 6/6/2013 20:56, titou10 titou10 wrote:
> DialogScope ?
> FlowScope ? (Possible confusion with JSF 2.2 ?)
> ExtendedConversationScope ?
> CustomConversationScope ?
> ConversationCustomScope ?
> ConversationExtendedScope ?
> ExtendedScope ?
> DSConversationScope ?
> Req
WizardScoped or FlowScoped
On 6/6/2013 20:56, titou10 titou10 wrote:
> DialogScope ?
> FlowScope ? (Possible confusion with JSF 2.2 ?)
> ExtendedConversationScope ?
> CustomConversationScope ?
> ConversationCustomScope ?
> ConversationExtendedScope ?
> ExtendedScope ?
> DSConversationScope ?
> Req
#1 imo those names don't fit at all.
#2 starting the scope explicitly is against the initial idea (please have a
look at [1] and even [2] as well as any other std. scope) and it's an
important (+ intended) difference.
regards,
gerhard
[1] http://os890.blogspot.co.at/2011/04/slides-codi-conversati
APIs, it covers all (or most of my
needs) and is really easy to use.
Adrian
De : titou10 titou10
À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
Envoyé le : Jeudi 6 juin 2013 14h56
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
DialogScope ?
FlowScope ? (Possible confusion wit
DialogScope ?
FlowScope ? (Possible confusion with JSF 2.2 ?)
ExtendedConversationScope ?
CustomConversationScope ?
ConversationCustomScope ?
ConversationExtendedScope ?
ExtendedScope ?
DSConversationScope ?
RequestExtendedScope ?
Also should this scope :
- be started and terminated explicitely a-
you are very welcome to suggest a better name.
regards,
gerhard
2013/6/6 titou10 titou10
> Suggestion:
> When porting CODI "ConversationScope" to DS, should it be possible to
> NOT name this Scope "ConversationScope"
> Currently, when using CODI, it is very confusing to have 2 different
> sco
Suggestion:
When porting CODI "ConversationScope" to DS, should it be possible to
NOT name this Scope "ConversationScope"
Currently, when using CODI, it is very confusing to have 2 different
scopes having the same "ConversationScope" name: the CDI one and the
CODI. Introduce a lot of confusion when
ssage -
>> From: John D. Ament
>> To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 15:31
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
>>
>> -1 for JSF support being a focus, since it makes it look like DS is a JSF
>> specific l
riginal Message -
> > From: John D. Ament
> > To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, 3 June 2013, 15:31
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
> >
> > -1 for JSF support being a focus, since it makes it look like DS is a JSF
&
t: Monday, 3 June 2013, 15:31
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
>
> -1 for JSF support being a focus, since it makes it look like DS is a JSF
> specific library (of course this is only my opinion).
>
> This was one of the benefits we had in Seam3, since all module
;
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
> >
> >
> > ____
> > De : titou10 titou10
> > À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> > Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 14h43
> > Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
> >
> >
Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 14h43
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
For us DS v0.5 should be focused on the JSF module and particularly
on porting CODI scopes top get rid of CODI asap. ie:
- port the CODI Conversation and related scopes to DS (Group etc.)
- Enhance the WindowScope.
> À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
> Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 14h43
> Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
>
>
> For us DS v0.5 should be focused on the JSF module and particularly
> on porting CODI scopes top get rid of CODI asap. ie:
> - port the CODI Conversat
other.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Adrian Gonzalez wrote:
> Sorry, forgot :
> - EAR support.
>
> Regards,
> Adrian
>
>
> De : Adrian Gonzalez
> À : "dev@deltaspike.apache.org"
> Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 15h18
&g
Sorry, forgot :
- EAR support.
Regards,
Adrian
De : Adrian Gonzalez
À : "dev@deltaspike.apache.org"
Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 15h18
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
Hello,
+1 for me too for :
- port the CODI Conversation a
drian
De : titou10 titou10
À : dev@deltaspike.apache.org
Envoyé le : Lundi 3 juin 2013 14h43
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
For us DS v0.5 should be focused on the JSF module and particularly
on porting CODI scopes top get rid of CODI asap. ie:
- por
;>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/6/1 Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>
>>>>> Cdi query stuff would be great too
>>>>> Le 1 juin 2013 13:12, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes should mainly be
t;> Le 1 juin 2013 13:12, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> Yes should mainly be a bugfix release with only a few new features.
>>>>>
>>>>> LieGrue,
>>>>> strub
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
1 juin 2013 13:12, "Mark Struberg" a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Yes should mainly be a bugfix release with only a few new features.
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> &
uld mainly be a bugfix release with only a few new features.
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > From: John D. Ament
>
> From: John D. Ament
> > >To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org; Mark Struberg
> > >Cc: deltaspike
> > >Sent: Saturday, 1 June 2013, 13:07
> > >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Mark,
> >
gt; >To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org; Mark Struberg
> >Cc: deltaspike
> >Sent: Saturday, 1 June 2013, 13:07
> >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-0.5 features
> >
> >
> >
> >Mark,
> >
> >
> >A little aggressive based on how long it took to get
Yes should mainly be a bugfix release with only a few new features.
LieGrue,
strub
>
> From: John D. Ament
>To: dev@deltaspike.apache.org; Mark Struberg
>Cc: deltaspike
>Sent: Saturday, 1 June 2013, 13:07
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] delta
Mark,
A little aggressive based on how long it took to get 0.4? Should this be a
small release then?
I'd like to add some level of BeanValidation support in this release, looks
like the CODI and Seam features are pretty similar; so adding support for a
ConstraintValidatorFactory that creates inj
Hi!
It's time to go for planing ds-0.5.
I'd say the release should be pretty small this time. Mostly bug fixes and a
few minor enhancements. And max 1 or 2 bigger bullet features.
The goal is to release ds-0.5 end of this month.
A few things on the list as I remember so far:
* Finish graduatio
38 matches
Mail list logo
