gnnn...
s/no movin/not moving/ :)
- Original Message -
> From: Mark Struberg
> To: "dev@openwebbeans.apache.org"
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 9:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Yan: javassist removal
>
> I fear this is not easy to do.
>
> Either we use commons-proxy (which is exactl
I fear this is not easy to do.
Either we use commons-proxy (which is exactly such an abstraction SPI layer) or
we just do it ourselfs. The real work is no movin the proxy generation to ASM
but to migrate our MethodHandlers to InvocationHandlers. It's not a huge
effort, but it is certainly quit
Speaking from the Commons side of the fence, if you are already
bridging APIs in OpenEJB resulting from use of the InvocationHandler
interface, and particularly if you are considering abandoning this in
favor of some other abstraction, Commons [proxy]'s
Interceptor|Invoker|ObjectProvider (for deleg
Hello David
I favor that we can implement a common SPI like other integrations and refactor
code to use SPI (Pluggable way of using javassist or ASM).
Thanks.
Gurkan
Kimden: David Blevins
Kime: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Ağustos 2
+1
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>
> Hi!
>
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenWebBeans-1.1.5 .
>
> This is a bugfix release of OpenWebBeans-1.1.x, thus no branch has been
> created.
> It mainly contains compatibility/portability/performance improvements
+1
-David
On Aug 8, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>
> Hi!
>
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apache OpenWebBeans-1.1.5 .
>
> This is a bugfix release of OpenWebBeans-1.1.x, thus no branch has been
> created.
> It mainly contains compatibility/portability/performance i
On Aug 9, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Sven Linstaedt wrote:
> Hi, sounds like you have something similar to commons-proxy [1] in
> mind, when creating an abstraction of the proxy class generation
> library. Have you already considered using it?
Just became aware of it yesterday.
ASM does the real work, a
On Aug 8, 2012, at 11:36 PM, Charles Moulliard wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Is it for performance reasons that you prefer to switch from Javassist to
> ASM (http://swapnil84.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/asm-vs-javassist/) ?
Pretty much. Slower, consumes more memory and generally overkill. The code to
> Source release:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheopenwebbeans-126/org/apache/openwebbeans/openwebbeans/1.1.5/openwebbeans-1.1.5-source-release.zip
+1
Hi,
why is there no link between svn repo and OWB jira project?
i'm used to subversion tab and it is missing here
any reason?
- Romain
gnnn, don't know why reply-to sometimes only sends to the original sender and
not to the list :/
- Forwarded Message -
> From: Mark Struberg
> To: Harald Wellmann
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 12:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] release Apache OpenWebBeans 1.1.5
>
> Hi Harald!
>
seems fine for me
+1
- Romain
2012/8/9 Gerhard Petracek
> +1
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/8/9 Mark Struberg
>
> > +1
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: Mark Struberg
> > > To: openwebbeans-dev ; "
> > u...@openwebbeans.apache.org"
> >
+1
regards,
gerhard
2012/8/9 Mark Struberg
> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Mark Struberg
> > To: openwebbeans-dev ; "
> u...@openwebbeans.apache.org"
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 1:01 AM
> > Subject: [VOTE] release Apache OpenWebBeans 1
+1
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Mark Struberg
> To: openwebbeans-dev ;
> "u...@openwebbeans.apache.org"
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 1:01 AM
> Subject: [VOTE] release Apache OpenWebBeans 1.1.5
>
>
>
> Hi!
>
>
> I'd like to call a VOTE on releasing Apac
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-668?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mark Struberg updated OWB-668:
--
Fix Version/s: 1.1.5
> A dynamically specified ProcessInjectionTarget is never invoked
>
Hi,
yes [proxy] was in the discussion, the choice will be done depending on
benchmarks
- Romain
2012/8/9 Sven Linstaedt
> Hi, sounds like you have something similar to commons-proxy [1] in
> mind, when creating an abstraction of the proxy class generation
> library. Have you already considere
Hi, sounds like you have something similar to commons-proxy [1] in
mind, when creating an abstraction of the proxy class generation
library. Have you already considered using it?
br, Sven
[1] https://commons.apache.org/proxy/
2012/8/9 David Blevins :
> Hey All,
>
> Heads up that I'd like to in
+1 indeed
- Romain
2012/8/9 Gerhard Petracek
> +1
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/8/9 Mark Struberg
>
> > +1 for ASM, we only use direct byte code manipulation anyway.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: Charles Moulliard
> > > To: dev@open
+1
regards,
gerhard
2012/8/9 Mark Struberg
> +1 for ASM, we only use direct byte code manipulation anyway.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Charles Moulliard
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 8:36 AM
> > Subject:
+1 for ASM, we only use direct byte code manipulation anyway.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Charles Moulliard
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 8:36 AM
> Subject: Re: javassist removal
>
> Hi David,
>
> Is it for performance reaso
20 matches
Mail list logo
