You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@deltaspike.apache.org by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/24 11:47:59 UTC
[REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
hi @ all,
i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because it's needed e.g.
if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would like to use
the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
(for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
regards,
gerhard
[1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
i moved [1] the utils and helper.
imo we should also unify the naming (at least the classes which only
contain static util methods should be consistent).
regards,
gerhard
[1]
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-deltaspike.git;a=commit;h=f3cc5673
2012/1/24 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> sounds like a clean approach.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
> > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 8:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53, Gerhard Petracek
> > <ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> hi,
> >>
> >> in this case we would have to move all util classes and helpers.
> >> maybe we should create an own package for such classes (e.g. util) ->
> we
> >> would have
> >> - api
> >> - spi
> >> - util
> >>
> >> in most cases users just have to use the api package.
> >> use-cases beyond that as well as portable cdi extensions which are
> based on
> >> deltaspike-core can also benefit from the spi package and in some cases
> >> from the util package.
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2012/1/24 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> >>
> >> > Hi!
> >> >
> >> > +1 for moving it to core-api.
> >> >
> >> > But as this is not a functionality a normal end user would user,
> > I'd
> >> > rather move this to an SPI package in core-api.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > LieGrue,
> >> > strub
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > > From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> >> > > To: deltaspike <de...@incubator.apache.org>
> >> > > Cc:
> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:47 AM
> >> > > Subject: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
> >> > >
> >> > > hi @ all,
> >> > >
> >> > > i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because
> > it's needed
> >> > e.g.
> >> > > if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would
> > like to
> >> > use
> >> > > the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
> >> > > (for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
> >> > >
> >> > > regards,
> >> > > gerhard
> >> > >
> >> > > [1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jason Porter
> > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
> >
> > Software Engineer
> > Open Source Advocate
> > Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
> >
> > PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> >
>
Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
sounds like a clean approach.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 8:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
>
> +1
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53, Gerhard Petracek
> <ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> hi,
>>
>> in this case we would have to move all util classes and helpers.
>> maybe we should create an own package for such classes (e.g. util) -> we
>> would have
>> - api
>> - spi
>> - util
>>
>> in most cases users just have to use the api package.
>> use-cases beyond that as well as portable cdi extensions which are based on
>> deltaspike-core can also benefit from the spi package and in some cases
>> from the util package.
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/1/24 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
>>
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > +1 for moving it to core-api.
>> >
>> > But as this is not a functionality a normal end user would user,
> I'd
>> > rather move this to an SPI package in core-api.
>> >
>> >
>> > LieGrue,
>> > strub
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
>> > > To: deltaspike <de...@incubator.apache.org>
>> > > Cc:
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:47 AM
>> > > Subject: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
>> > >
>> > > hi @ all,
>> > >
>> > > i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because
> it's needed
>> > e.g.
>> > > if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would
> like to
>> > use
>> > > the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
>> > > (for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
>> > >
>> > > regards,
>> > > gerhard
>> > >
>> > > [1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Porter
> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>
> Software Engineer
> Open Source Advocate
> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>
> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>
Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:53, Gerhard Petracek
<ge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> hi,
>
> in this case we would have to move all util classes and helpers.
> maybe we should create an own package for such classes (e.g. util) -> we
> would have
> - api
> - spi
> - util
>
> in most cases users just have to use the api package.
> use-cases beyond that as well as portable cdi extensions which are based on
> deltaspike-core can also benefit from the spi package and in some cases
> from the util package.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/1/24 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > +1 for moving it to core-api.
> >
> > But as this is not a functionality a normal end user would user, I'd
> > rather move this to an SPI package in core-api.
> >
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> > > To: deltaspike <de...@incubator.apache.org>
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:47 AM
> > > Subject: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
> > >
> > > hi @ all,
> > >
> > > i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because it's needed
> > e.g.
> > > if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would like to
> > use
> > > the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
> > > (for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > gerhard
> > >
> > > [1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
> > >
> >
>
--
Jason Porter
http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
hi,
in this case we would have to move all util classes and helpers.
maybe we should create an own package for such classes (e.g. util) -> we
would have
- api
- spi
- util
in most cases users just have to use the api package.
use-cases beyond that as well as portable cdi extensions which are based on
deltaspike-core can also benefit from the spi package and in some cases
from the util package.
regards,
gerhard
2012/1/24 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>
> Hi!
>
> +1 for moving it to core-api.
>
> But as this is not a functionality a normal end user would user, I'd
> rather move this to an SPI package in core-api.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> > To: deltaspike <de...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:47 AM
> > Subject: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
> >
> > hi @ all,
> >
> > i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because it's needed
> e.g.
> > if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would like to
> use
> > the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
> > (for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> > [1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
> >
>
Re: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
Hi!
+1 for moving it to core-api.
But as this is not a functionality a normal end user would user, I'd rather move this to an SPI package in core-api.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> To: deltaspike <de...@incubator.apache.org>
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:47 AM
> Subject: [REVIEW] ProjectStageProducer (part of DELTASPIKE-21)
>
> hi @ all,
>
> i moved the ProjectStageProducer to the api module because it's needed e.g.
> if a portable cdi extension (which uses deltaspike-core) would like to use
> the project-stage during the bootstrapping process.
> (for sure we can also move it to an other package.)
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://s.apache.org/Obx
>