You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by "Mark Struberg (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2011/02/13 21:40:57 UTC
[jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12994150#comment-12994150 ]
Mark Struberg commented on OWB-472:
-----------------------------------
I fear we need to rollback the commits. The problem with this is that the whole BDA definition is UTTERLY broken in the spec. This resulted in a spec change which is due to 1.1. See CDI-18 for more information. By implementing the same sh**t than Weld currently has (they are forced to, but hey, we are not the RI ;) we just corrupt any normal modus operandi.
Comments are welcome.
> archive centric beans.xml enabling
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: OWB-472
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472
> Project: OpenWebBeans
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Injection and Lookup
> Reporter: Jacquelle Leggett
> Assignee: Mark Struberg
> Attachments: patch.txt
>
> Original Estimate: 336h
> Remaining Estimate: 336h
>
> This issue was discussed in great detail in June (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openwebbeans-dev/201006.mbox/browser) on the developers forum. The title of the thread is "problems with lack of archive-centric BeanManager".
> The main problem is described below (snippet from discussion):
> "...Our current design does not permit either of the following scenarions, AFAICT:
> b.jar and c.jar both enable the interceptor defined in a.jar
> (treated as a duplicate)
> Exactly one of b.jar and c.jar enables the interceptor defined in
> a.jar (ends up enabled for beans from either archive if enabled in one
> -- this is in the more troubling neighborhood)..."
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
Re: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yes - it's non-intrusive because i fixed it.
Non-intrusive in terms of technical rationale to call for a revert,
not non-intrusive in terms of you had to refactor to use trunk in an
appserver.
> however, we have a spi (ScannerService) for such additional features.
We have many SPIs and Plugins, and in trunk we have a set that can
satisfy the requirements of CDI 1.0.
Re: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com>.
yes - it's non-intrusive because i fixed it.
however, we have a spi (ScannerService) for such additional features.
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2011/2/13 Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
> Isn't the current code pretty non-intrusive and no behavior change by
> default?
>
> Is there something like a draft to cite that shows what overhaul in
> this area is due in 1.1?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mark Struberg (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
> Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM
> Subject: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>
>
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12994150#comment-12994150
> ]
>
> Mark Struberg commented on OWB-472:
> -----------------------------------
>
> I fear we need to rollback the commits. The problem with this is that
> the whole BDA definition is UTTERLY broken in the spec. This resulted
> in a spec change which is due to 1.1. See CDI-18 for more information.
> By implementing the same sh**t than Weld currently has (they are
> forced to, but hey, we are not the RI ;) we just corrupt any normal
> modus operandi.
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> > archive centric beans.xml enabling
> > -----------------------------------
> >
> > Key: OWB-472
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472
> > Project: OpenWebBeans
> > Issue Type: Improvement
> > Components: Injection and Lookup
> > Reporter: Jacquelle Leggett
> > Assignee: Mark Struberg
> > Attachments: patch.txt
> >
> > Original Estimate: 336h
> > Remaining Estimate: 336h
> >
> > This issue was discussed in great detail in June (
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openwebbeans-dev/201006.mbox/browser)
> on the developers forum. The title of the thread is "problems with lack of
> archive-centric BeanManager".
> > The main problem is described below (snippet from discussion):
> > "...Our current design does not permit either of the following
> scenarions, AFAICT:
> > b.jar and c.jar both enable the interceptor defined in a.jar
> > (treated as a duplicate)
> > Exactly one of b.jar and c.jar enables the interceptor defined in
> > a.jar (ends up enabled for beans from either archive if enabled in one
> > -- this is in the more troubling neighborhood)..."
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Eric Covener
> covener@gmail.com
>
Re: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2011/2/13 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-18
>
> My personal fear is that this will quickly lead to lots of follow up
> failures like one can currently see in glassfish and JBossAS.
>
> For getting this done if e.g. an EE server needs to implement the CDI-1.0
> spec then this can still be provided via a custom ScannerService Impl,
> isn't?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- On Sun, 2/13/11, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml
> enabling
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 8:52 PM
> > Isn't the current code pretty
> > non-intrusive and no behavior change by default?
> >
> > Is there something like a draft to cite that shows what
> > overhaul in
> > this area is due in 1.1?
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Mark Struberg (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
> > Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM
> > Subject: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric
> > beans.xml enabling
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> > [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12994150#comment-12994150
> > ]
> >
> > Mark Struberg commented on OWB-472:
> > -----------------------------------
> >
> > I fear we need to rollback the commits. The problem with
> > this is that
> > the whole BDA definition is UTTERLY broken in the spec.
> > This resulted
> > in a spec change which is due to 1.1. See CDI-18 for more
> > information.
> > By implementing the same sh**t than Weld currently has
> > (they are
> > forced to, but hey, we are not the RI ;) we just corrupt
> > any normal
> > modus operandi.
> >
> > Comments are welcome.
> >
> > > archive centric beans.xml enabling
> > > -----------------------------------
> > >
> > > Key: OWB-472
> > > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472
> > > Project: OpenWebBeans
> > > Issue Type: Improvement
> > > Components: Injection and Lookup
> > > Reporter: Jacquelle Leggett
> > > Assignee: Mark Struberg
> > > Attachments: patch.txt
> > >
> > > Original Estimate: 336h
> > > Remaining Estimate: 336h
> > >
> > > This issue was discussed in great detail in June (
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openwebbeans-dev/201006.mbox/browser
> )
> > on the developers forum. The title of the thread is
> > "problems with lack of archive-centric BeanManager".
> > > The main problem is described below (snippet from
> > discussion):
> > > "...Our current design does not permit either of the
> > following scenarions, AFAICT:
> > > b.jar and c.jar both enable the interceptor defined
> > in a.jar
> > > (treated as a duplicate)
> > > Exactly one of b.jar and c.jar enables the
> > interceptor defined in
> > > a.jar (ends up enabled for beans from either archive
> > if enabled in one
> > > -- this is in the more troubling neighborhood)..."
> >
> > --
> > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > -
> > For more information on JIRA, see:
> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Eric Covener
> > covener@gmail.com
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>.
I believe all of the selection logic is disabled by default. In other words
it doesn't look at the location of the beans.xml to decide which
interceptors, decorators & alternatives to use by default. However, there
was some plumbing put in to be able to pass that information down into the
code, and that plumbing caused at least one problem on a specific
application server that Gerhard already fixed.
I would strongly disagree that this is a "feature". I would definitely
agree there are different ways to interpret the spec, and I think this code
provides a behavior that matches a possible interpretation.
Sincerely,
Joe
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> joe told me that there is no impact (per default) and that wasn't correct.
>
> OWB-472 ("optional support for archive centric beans.xml") looks like a new
> feature which shouldn't be in the core.
> furthermore, the implementation is also improvable.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
>
>
> 2011/2/13 Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
>
> > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> wrote:
> > > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-18
> > > My personal fear is that this will quickly lead to lots of follow up
> > failures like one can currently see in glassfish and JBossAS.
> >
> > The concept or the code we have? What failure in the other servers?
> >
> > > For getting this done if e.g. an EE server needs to implement the
> CDI-1.0
> > spec then this can still be provided via a custom ScannerService Impl,
> > isn't?
> >
> > I don't think so. Without the feature, the core doesn't ask anything
> > related to a scanner service about this enablement (IIUC, I'm not
> > intimately familiar with this one)
> >
> > You could stuff more into the ScannerService SPI instead of having it
> > split between the extensions to ScannerService and the XMLBDA thing,
> > but that seems like a cosmetic distinction.
> >
>
Re: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com>.
joe told me that there is no impact (per default) and that wasn't correct.
OWB-472 ("optional support for archive centric beans.xml") looks like a new
feature which shouldn't be in the core.
furthermore, the implementation is also improvable.
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2011/2/13 Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-18
> > My personal fear is that this will quickly lead to lots of follow up
> failures like one can currently see in glassfish and JBossAS.
>
> The concept or the code we have? What failure in the other servers?
>
> > For getting this done if e.g. an EE server needs to implement the CDI-1.0
> spec then this can still be provided via a custom ScannerService Impl,
> isn't?
>
> I don't think so. Without the feature, the core doesn't ask anything
> related to a scanner service about this enablement (IIUC, I'm not
> intimately familiar with this one)
>
> You could stuff more into the ScannerService SPI instead of having it
> split between the extensions to ScannerService and the XMLBDA thing,
> but that seems like a cosmetic distinction.
>
Re: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-18
> My personal fear is that this will quickly lead to lots of follow up failures like one can currently see in glassfish and JBossAS.
The concept or the code we have? What failure in the other servers?
> For getting this done if e.g. an EE server needs to implement the CDI-1.0 spec then this can still be provided via a custom ScannerService Impl, isn't?
I don't think so. Without the feature, the core doesn't ask anything
related to a scanner service about this enablement (IIUC, I'm not
intimately familiar with this one)
You could stuff more into the ScannerService SPI instead of having it
split between the extensions to ScannerService and the XMLBDA thing,
but that seems like a cosmetic distinction.
Re: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-18
My personal fear is that this will quickly lead to lots of follow up failures like one can currently see in glassfish and JBossAS.
For getting this done if e.g. an EE server needs to implement the CDI-1.0 spec then this can still be provided via a custom ScannerService Impl, isn't?
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Sun, 2/13/11, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 8:52 PM
> Isn't the current code pretty
> non-intrusive and no behavior change by default?
>
> Is there something like a draft to cite that shows what
> overhaul in
> this area is due in 1.1?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mark Struberg (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
> Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM
> Subject: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric
> beans.xml enabling
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>
>
>
> [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12994150#comment-12994150
> ]
>
> Mark Struberg commented on OWB-472:
> -----------------------------------
>
> I fear we need to rollback the commits. The problem with
> this is that
> the whole BDA definition is UTTERLY broken in the spec.
> This resulted
> in a spec change which is due to 1.1. See CDI-18 for more
> information.
> By implementing the same sh**t than Weld currently has
> (they are
> forced to, but hey, we are not the RI ;) we just corrupt
> any normal
> modus operandi.
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> > archive centric beans.xml enabling
> > -----------------------------------
> >
> > Key: OWB-472
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472
> > Project: OpenWebBeans
> > Issue Type: Improvement
> > Components: Injection and Lookup
> > Reporter: Jacquelle Leggett
> > Assignee: Mark Struberg
> > Attachments: patch.txt
> >
> > Original Estimate: 336h
> > Remaining Estimate: 336h
> >
> > This issue was discussed in great detail in June (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openwebbeans-dev/201006.mbox/browser)
> on the developers forum. The title of the thread is
> "problems with lack of archive-centric BeanManager".
> > The main problem is described below (snippet from
> discussion):
> > "...Our current design does not permit either of the
> following scenarions, AFAICT:
> > b.jar and c.jar both enable the interceptor defined
> in a.jar
> > (treated as a duplicate)
> > Exactly one of b.jar and c.jar enables the
> interceptor defined in
> > a.jar (ends up enabled for beans from either archive
> if enabled in one
> > -- this is in the more troubling neighborhood)..."
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Eric Covener
> covener@gmail.com
>
Fwd: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
Isn't the current code pretty non-intrusive and no behavior change by default?
Is there something like a draft to cite that shows what overhaul in
this area is due in 1.1?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Struberg (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
Date: Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 3:40 PM
Subject: [jira] Commented: (OWB-472) archive centric beans.xml enabling
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12994150#comment-12994150
]
Mark Struberg commented on OWB-472:
-----------------------------------
I fear we need to rollback the commits. The problem with this is that
the whole BDA definition is UTTERLY broken in the spec. This resulted
in a spec change which is due to 1.1. See CDI-18 for more information.
By implementing the same sh**t than Weld currently has (they are
forced to, but hey, we are not the RI ;) we just corrupt any normal
modus operandi.
Comments are welcome.
> archive centric beans.xml enabling
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: OWB-472
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-472
> Project: OpenWebBeans
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Injection and Lookup
> Reporter: Jacquelle Leggett
> Assignee: Mark Struberg
> Attachments: patch.txt
>
> Original Estimate: 336h
> Remaining Estimate: 336h
>
> This issue was discussed in great detail in June (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/openwebbeans-dev/201006.mbox/browser) on the developers forum. The title of the thread is "problems with lack of archive-centric BeanManager".
> The main problem is described below (snippet from discussion):
> "...Our current design does not permit either of the following scenarions, AFAICT:
> b.jar and c.jar both enable the interceptor defined in a.jar
> (treated as a duplicate)
> Exactly one of b.jar and c.jar enables the interceptor defined in
> a.jar (ends up enabled for beans from either archive if enabled in one
> -- this is in the more troubling neighborhood)..."
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
--
Eric Covener
covener@gmail.com