Since the hollidays are over and everybody is back to work: any update
on this?
does somebody at google want to maintain the persist extension?
On 12/19/2013 06:31 PM, Christian Gruber wrote:
So that's not entirely true anymore. We have a few folks using it
internally. I had originally been cool with detaching it (I guess I
still am, since the author did effectively drop it after adding it)
from the main Guice project, but we should see if there are users
internally who want to maintain our side of it.
c.
On 19 Dec 2013, at 4:57, Sam Berlin wrote:
To be perfectly honest, I would like to drop persist from the
extensions we
ship. The original author more or less dropped the code in the
repository
and then stopped maintaining it immediately. No one within Google
really
uses it, and we have no familiarity with it. If another project
wants to
fork and maintain it, that would be great.
sam
On Dec 19, 2013 1:50 AM, scl st.clas...@gmx.ch wrote:
After Sam's call to
bumphttps://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/google-guice/ZZpFD3e_8v0the
issues we would like to have fixed in 4.0 I went through the list of
issues regarding the persist extension.
Simply because I know it the best and because I ran into some of the
issues myself.
Going over the list I found a bunch of issues which are more or less
straight forward to fix.
But what disturbed me was, that several issues which have gotten a
lot of
attention (or at least a lot of comments) have the same root cause
which is
not trivial to solve.
So my question is how much time do you have at google for discussing
and
reviewing the possible solutions (including tests and patches).
Or would you prefer to address the more complex problems in
extensions at
a later time, since extensions can be released separately from the
core?
The issues I'm talking about are
597http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=597,
604 http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=604,
730http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=730,
739 http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=739 (issue
731 http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=731
requests
a new feature which could be used as a workaround).
The underlying cause is that calling ProviderEntityManager.get()
outside
of a UnitOfWork will implicitly start a UnitOfWork which is never
ended.
If you do have time to address the above issue I would be more than
willing to participate in the process of getting it solved.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
google-guice group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an
email to google-guice+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-guice@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups google-guice group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to google-guice+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-guice@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Christian Gruber :: Google, Inc. :: Java Core Libraries :: Dependency
Injection
email: cgru...@google.com mobile: +1 (646) 807-9839
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
google-guice group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-guice+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-guice@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
