"annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
"javax.servlet.annotation", etc.

I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
"org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
too.

Anybody against that?;-)

I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.

Werner

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

+1

Am 06.12.14 um 20:57 schrieb Andres Almiray:
> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>
> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>   - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to an
> stable set
>   - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>   - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>   - rinse and repeat.
>
> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is on
> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> --
> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
> those who don't.
> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> than
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>> theonly
>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> friendly.
>> is
>> Lead |

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

+1

I also filed a JIRA ticket on another issue (that one's really a bug;-)
@Anatole
Are you or others able to add a few basic components like "API", "Core",
etc. in JIRA?

Thanks,
Werner




On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Summarizing I suggest we go on with 'annotation' as of now and focus on
> other topics As said we can rethink this still later, if necessary. If not
> I am fine with that ;) if somebody has troubles with that let me know.
>
> i saw that CMS is now answring request on our project site, so we should
> start adding content there. I suggest we can use deltaspike as a jump
> start...?
>
> Cheers
> Anatole
> Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mo., 8. Dez. 2014 um 12:01:
>
> > Especially concrete tasks are better turned into a JIRA ticket.
> > That's where I made remarks about this issue and the owner of the ticket
> > addressed it, usually better to see, what was done and what wasn't;-)
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't continue the discussion because for now (similar to e.g. what
> > > Andres suggested, the singular vs. plural is just marginal, more
> > important
> > > to have a descriptive name for now;-) Anatole fixed it, so I don't even
> > > know who might have continued the discussion, but I don't see a reason.
> > >
> > > At DeviceMap we also put up some plans and design for future versions,
> > > probably best to try this here, too;-)
> > >
> > > Werner
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> @werner:
> > >> although i appreciate the commit (if you mean that), it sounded like
> you
> > >> continued with the discussion because you don't agree.
> > >> if we have an agreement, we are done. otherwise it needs to be
> resolved
> > >> (independent of a commit).
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> gerhard
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-12-07 21:19 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >>
> > >> > It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)
> > >> >
> > >> > Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I
> guess
> > we
> > >> > should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> > Werner
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > >> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a
> > >> specific
> > >> > > approach.
> > >> > > however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful
> (or
> > >> no)
> > >> > vs.
> > >> > > a generic package-name.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > regards,
> > >> > > gerhard
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even
> > more
> > >> > with
> > >> > > EE
> > >> > > > 8;-)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside
> from
> > >> > > > standalone app configuration.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Werner
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it
> > >> was a
> > >> > > > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks
> > weird
> > >> for
> > >> > > > > me as a user.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >:
> > >> > > > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from
> > >> javax.annotation
> > >> > > like
> > >> > > > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <
> > >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >> What does Servlet use?
> > >> > > > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not
> > >> "javax.servlets";-)
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package
> > >> > contains a
> > >> > > > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes
> > sense.
> > >> > > > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could
> be
> > >> > called
> > >> > > > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much
> > all
> > >> > Java
> > >> > > EE
> > >> > > > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every
> > JSR
> > >> > that
> > >> > > > > doesn't
> > >> > > > > >> call it something else sticks to.
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > > > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this
> > >> > aspect...CDI,
> > >> > > > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it.
> Servlet
> > >> uses
> > >> > > it
> > >> > > > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >> >:
> > >> > > > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> > >> > > > > Groov/Grails;-)
> > >> > > > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always
> > >> "annotation",
> > >> > > see
> > >> > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/
> > springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.
> > html#package.description
> > >> > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> > Werner
> > >> > > > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
> > >> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such
> > >> package
> > >> > is
> > >> > > > > called
> > >> > > > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent,
> > given
> > >> > other
> > >> > > > > >>> packages
> > >> > > > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So
> > either
> > >> > > > multiple
> > >> > > > > >>> teams
> > >> > > > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >> Werner
> > >> > > > > >>> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> > >> > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> > >> > > > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well
> keep
> > >> > > "annot"
> > >> > > > > for
> > >> > > > > >>> >>> now;-)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> > >> > > > aalmiray@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right
> > away.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can
> later
> > >> > rename
> > >> > > it
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on
> > >> experience.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as
> package
> > >> > names)
> > >> > > > is:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order
> to
> > >> > evolve
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > >>> API to
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> an
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> stable set
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as
> > needed.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick
> one
> > >> name
> > >> > > (my
> > >> > > > > vote
> > >> > > > > >>> is
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> on
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> Andres
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> --
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
> > >> administrator.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> > >> > > understand
> > >> > > > > >>> binary,
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> and
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
> > >> recursion.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals
> > no?
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > >> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several
> > >> packages
> > >> > > > > >>> "binding" or
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer
> > >> version.
> > >> > It
> > >> > > > also
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> depends on
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to
> > draft
> > >> > this
> > >> > > in
> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > > > > >>> Wiki
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > than
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > <
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
> > >> > > annotation;
> > >> > > > > What
> > >> > > > > >>> I
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today.
> Well I
> > >> > think
> > >> > > my
> > >> > > > > >>> opinion
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > >> > > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.
> > 0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the
> package
> > >> name
> > >> > > > > >>> "annotate"
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> over
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain
> > >> Manni-Bucau <
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate
> annotation",
> > >> seems
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > >>> first
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> one
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> > >> > > > annotation".
> > >> > > > > >>> Then
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > theonly
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have
> no
> > >> doubt
> > >> > > > we'll
> > >> > > > > >>> get
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> there.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer
> <
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search
> field?
> > >> > Tamaya
> > >> > > > > config
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user
> and
> > >> > search
> > >> > > > > engine
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain
> > >> Manni-Bucau:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old*
> > >> > projects/
> > >> > > > > which
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> means it
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > is
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly
> others
> > >> ;)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > >> > > > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards
> > >> > (especially
> > >> > > > Java
> > >> > > > > >>> SE or
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> EE)
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for
> > package
> > >> > names
> > >> > > > is
> > >> > > > > >>> rare to
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee
> > Member,
> > >> > JSR
> > >> > > > 363
> > >> > > > > Co
> > >> > > > > >>> Spec
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language
> Champion
> > |
> > >> > > Apache
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> Committer |
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354
> |
> > >> > > > > @AgoravaProj |
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+
> > >> gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain
> > >> > Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> > >> > > > > Deutschland/Germany
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>>
> > >> > > > > >>> >>
> > >> > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

Summarizing I suggest we go on with 'annotation' as of now and focus on
other topics As said we can rethink this still later, if necessary. If not
I am fine with that ;) if somebody has troubles with that let me know.

i saw that CMS is now answring request on our project site, so we should
start adding content there. I suggest we can use deltaspike as a jump
start...?

Cheers
Anatole
Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mo., 8. Dez. 2014 um 12:01:

> Especially concrete tasks are better turned into a JIRA ticket.
> That's where I made remarks about this issue and the owner of the ticket
> addressed it, usually better to see, what was done and what wasn't;-)
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't continue the discussion because for now (similar to e.g. what
> > Andres suggested, the singular vs. plural is just marginal, more
> important
> > to have a descriptive name for now;-) Anatole fixed it, so I don't even
> > know who might have continued the discussion, but I don't see a reason.
> >
> > At DeviceMap we also put up some plans and design for future versions,
> > probably best to try this here, too;-)
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> @werner:
> >> although i appreciate the commit (if you mean that), it sounded like you
> >> continued with the discussion because you don't agree.
> >> if we have an agreement, we are done. otherwise it needs to be resolved
> >> (independent of a commit).
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-07 21:19 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> > It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)
> >> >
> >> > Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I guess
> we
> >> > should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Werner
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> >> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a
> >> specific
> >> > > approach.
> >> > > however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or
> >> no)
> >> > vs.
> >> > > a generic package-name.
> >> > >
> >> > > regards,
> >> > > gerhard
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even
> more
> >> > with
> >> > > EE
> >> > > > 8;-)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
> >> > > > standalone app configuration.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Werner
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it
> >> was a
> >> > > > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks
> weird
> >> for
> >> > > > > me as a user.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> > > > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from
> >> javax.annotation
> >> > > like
> >> > > > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <
> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> What does Servlet use?
> >> > > > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not
> >> "javax.servlets";-)
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package
> >> > contains a
> >> > > > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes
> sense.
> >> > > > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be
> >> > called
> >> > > > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much
> all
> >> > Java
> >> > > EE
> >> > > > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every
> JSR
> >> > that
> >> > > > > doesn't
> >> > > > > >> call it something else sticks to.
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> > > > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this
> >> > aspect...CDI,
> >> > > > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet
> >> uses
> >> > > it
> >> > > > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> > > > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> >> > > > > Groov/Grails;-)
> >> > > > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always
> >> "annotation",
> >> > > see
> >> > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/
> springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.
> html#package.description
> >> > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > >>> > Werner
> >> > > > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
> >> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such
> >> package
> >> > is
> >> > > > > called
> >> > > > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent,
> given
> >> > other
> >> > > > > >>> packages
> >> > > > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So
> either
> >> > > > multiple
> >> > > > > >>> teams
> >> > > > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> >> > > > > >>> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >> Werner
> >> > > > > >>> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> >> > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> >> > > > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep
> >> > > "annot"
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >>> >>> now;-)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> >> > > > aalmiray@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right
> away.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later
> >> > rename
> >> > > it
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on
> >> experience.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package
> >> > names)
> >> > > > is:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to
> >> > evolve
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >>> API to
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> an
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> stable set
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as
> needed.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one
> >> name
> >> > > (my
> >> > > > > vote
> >> > > > > >>> is
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> on
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> Andres
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> --
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
> >> administrator.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> >> > > understand
> >> > > > > >>> binary,
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> and
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
> >> recursion.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals
> no?
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> >> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> > > > >:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several
> >> packages
> >> > > > > >>> "binding" or
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer
> >> version.
> >> > It
> >> > > > also
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> depends on
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to
> draft
> >> > this
> >> > > in
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >>> Wiki
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > than
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
> >> > > annotation;
> >> > > > > What
> >> > > > > >>> I
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I
> >> > think
> >> > > my
> >> > > > > >>> opinion
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> >> > > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.
> 0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package
> >> name
> >> > > > > >>> "annotate"
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> over
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain
> >> Manni-Bucau <
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation",
> >> seems
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > >>> first
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> one
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> >> > > > annotation".
> >> > > > > >>> Then
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > theonly
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no
> >> doubt
> >> > > > we'll
> >> > > > > >>> get
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> there.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field?
> >> > Tamaya
> >> > > > > config
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and
> >> > search
> >> > > > > engine
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain
> >> Manni-Bucau:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old*
> >> > projects/
> >> > > > > which
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> means it
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > is
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others
> >> ;)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> >> > > > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards
> >> > (especially
> >> > > > Java
> >> > > > > >>> SE or
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> EE)
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for
> package
> >> > names
> >> > > > is
> >> > > > > >>> rare to
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee
> Member,
> >> > JSR
> >> > > > 363
> >> > > > > Co
> >> > > > > >>> Spec
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion
> |
> >> > > Apache
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> Committer |
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> >> > > > > @AgoravaProj |
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+
> >> gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain
> >> > Manni-Bucau
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> >> > > > > Deutschland/Germany
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> >> > > > > >>> >>>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>>
> >> > > > > >>> >>
> >> > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Especially concrete tasks are better turned into a JIRA ticket.
That's where I made remarks about this issue and the owner of the ticket
addressed it, usually better to see, what was done and what wasn't;-)


On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't continue the discussion because for now (similar to e.g. what
> Andres suggested, the singular vs. plural is just marginal, more important
> to have a descriptive name for now;-) Anatole fixed it, so I don't even
> know who might have continued the discussion, but I don't see a reason.
>
> At DeviceMap we also put up some plans and design for future versions,
> probably best to try this here, too;-)
>
> Werner
>
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @werner:
>> although i appreciate the commit (if you mean that), it sounded like you
>> continued with the discussion because you don't agree.
>> if we have an agreement, we are done. otherwise it needs to be resolved
>> (independent of a commit).
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-07 21:19 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)
>> >
>> > Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I guess we
>> > should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Werner
>> >
>> > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
>> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a
>> specific
>> > > approach.
>> > > however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or
>> no)
>> > vs.
>> > > a generic package-name.
>> > >
>> > > regards,
>> > > gerhard
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > >
>> > > > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more
>> > with
>> > > EE
>> > > > 8;-)
>> > > >
>> > > > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
>> > > > standalone app configuration.
>> > > >
>> > > > Werner
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it
>> was a
>> > > > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird
>> for
>> > > > > me as a user.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > @rmannibucau
>> > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > > > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from
>> javax.annotation
>> > > like
>> > > > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <
>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> What does Servlet use?
>> > > > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not
>> "javax.servlets";-)
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package
>> > contains a
>> > > > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
>> > > > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be
>> > called
>> > > > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all
>> > Java
>> > > EE
>> > > > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR
>> > that
>> > > > > doesn't
>> > > > > >> call it something else sticks to.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this
>> > aspect...CDI,
>> > > > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet
>> uses
>> > > it
>> > > > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> @rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >:
>> > > > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
>> > > > > Groov/Grails;-)
>> > > > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always
>> "annotation",
>> > > see
>> > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
>> > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > >>> > Werner
>> > > > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
>> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such
>> package
>> > is
>> > > > > called
>> > > > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given
>> > other
>> > > > > >>> packages
>> > > > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either
>> > > > multiple
>> > > > > >>> teams
>> > > > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
>> > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > >>> >> Werner
>> > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
>> > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
>> > > > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep
>> > > "annot"
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > >>> >>> now;-)
>> > > > > >>> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
>> > > > aalmiray@gmail.com
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >>> >>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later
>> > rename
>> > > it
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on
>> experience.
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package
>> > names)
>> > > > is:
>> > > > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to
>> > evolve
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >>> API to
>> > > > > >>> >>>> an
>> > > > > >>> >>>> stable set
>> > > > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>> > > > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>> > > > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one
>> name
>> > > (my
>> > > > > vote
>> > > > > >>> is
>> > > > > >>> >>>> on
>> > > > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
>> > > > > >>> >>>> Andres
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
>> > > > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> > > > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> > > > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> > > > > >>> >>>> --
>> > > > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
>> administrator.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
>> > > understand
>> > > > > >>> binary,
>> > > > > >>> >>>> and
>> > > > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
>> recursion.
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
>> > > > >:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several
>> packages
>> > > > > >>> "binding" or
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer
>> version.
>> > It
>> > > > also
>> > > > > >>> >>>> depends on
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft
>> > this
>> > > in
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > >>> Wiki
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > than
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
>> > > annotation;
>> > > > > What
>> > > > > >>> I
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I
>> > think
>> > > my
>> > > > > >>> opinion
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>> > > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package
>> name
>> > > > > >>> "annotate"
>> > > > > >>> >>>> over
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain
>> Manni-Bucau <
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation",
>> seems
>> > > the
>> > > > > >>> first
>> > > > > >>> >>>> one
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
>> > > > annotation".
>> > > > > >>> Then
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > theonly
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no
>> doubt
>> > > > we'll
>> > > > > >>> get
>> > > > > >>> >>>> there.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field?
>> > Tamaya
>> > > > > config
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and
>> > search
>> > > > > engine
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain
>> Manni-Bucau:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old*
>> > projects/
>> > > > > which
>> > > > > >>> >>>> means it
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > is
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others
>> ;)
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>> > > > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards
>> > (especially
>> > > > Java
>> > > > > >>> SE or
>> > > > > >>> >>>> EE)
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package
>> > names
>> > > > is
>> > > > > >>> rare to
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member,
>> > JSR
>> > > > 363
>> > > > > Co
>> > > > > >>> Spec
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion |
>> > > Apache
>> > > > > >>> >>>> Committer |
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
>> > > > > @AgoravaProj |
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+
>> gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain
>> > Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
>> > > > > Deutschland/Germany
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
>> > > > > >>> >>>> >
>> > > > > >>> >>>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>>
>> > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

I don't continue the discussion because for now (similar to e.g. what
Andres suggested, the singular vs. plural is just marginal, more important
to have a descriptive name for now;-) Anatole fixed it, so I don't even
know who might have continued the discussion, but I don't see a reason.

At DeviceMap we also put up some plans and design for future versions,
probably best to try this here, too;-)

Werner

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Gerhard Petracek <
gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:

> @werner:
> although i appreciate the commit (if you mean that), it sounded like you
> continued with the discussion because you don't agree.
> if we have an agreement, we are done. otherwise it needs to be resolved
> (independent of a commit).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-07 21:19 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
> > It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)
> >
> > Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I guess we
> > should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Werner
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a
> specific
> > > approach.
> > > however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or no)
> > vs.
> > > a generic package-name.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > gerhard
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more
> > with
> > > EE
> > > > 8;-)
> > > >
> > > > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
> > > > standalone app configuration.
> > > >
> > > > Werner
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was
> a
> > > > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird
> for
> > > > > me as a user.
> > > > >
> > > > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau
> > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from
> javax.annotation
> > > like
> > > > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> What does Servlet use?
> > > > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package
> > contains a
> > > > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> > > > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be
> > called
> > > > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all
> > Java
> > > EE
> > > > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR
> > that
> > > > > doesn't
> > > > > >> call it something else sticks to.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this
> > aspect...CDI,
> > > > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet
> uses
> > > it
> > > > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> @rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >:
> > > > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> > > > > Groov/Grails;-)
> > > > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always
> "annotation",
> > > see
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Werner
> > > > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package
> > is
> > > > > called
> > > > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given
> > other
> > > > > >>> packages
> > > > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either
> > > > multiple
> > > > > >>> teams
> > > > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >> Werner
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> > > > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep
> > > "annot"
> > > > > for
> > > > > >>> >>> now;-)
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> > > > aalmiray@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> > > > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later
> > rename
> > > it
> > > > > to
> > > > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on
> experience.
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package
> > names)
> > > > is:
> > > > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to
> > evolve
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> API to
> > > > > >>> >>>> an
> > > > > >>> >>>> stable set
> > > > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> > > > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> > > > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one
> name
> > > (my
> > > > > vote
> > > > > >>> is
> > > > > >>> >>>> on
> > > > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>> >>>> Andres
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> > > > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > > > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > > > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > > > > >>> >>>> --
> > > > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
> administrator.
> > > > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> > > understand
> > > > > >>> binary,
> > > > > >>> >>>> and
> > > > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> > > > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
> recursion.
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several
> packages
> > > > > >>> "binding" or
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version.
> > It
> > > > also
> > > > > >>> >>>> depends on
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft
> > this
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > >>> Wiki
> > > > > >>> >>>> > than
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
> > > annotation;
> > > > > What
> > > > > >>> I
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I
> > think
> > > my
> > > > > >>> opinion
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package
> name
> > > > > >>> "annotate"
> > > > > >>> >>>> over
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> <
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation",
> seems
> > > the
> > > > > >>> first
> > > > > >>> >>>> one
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> > > > annotation".
> > > > > >>> Then
> > > > > >>> >>>> > theonly
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no
> doubt
> > > > we'll
> > > > > >>> get
> > > > > >>> >>>> there.
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> > > > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field?
> > Tamaya
> > > > > config
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and
> > search
> > > > > engine
> > > > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old*
> > projects/
> > > > > which
> > > > > >>> >>>> means it
> > > > > >>> >>>> > is
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > > > >>> >>>> >:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards
> > (especially
> > > > Java
> > > > > >>> SE or
> > > > > >>> >>>> EE)
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package
> > names
> > > > is
> > > > > >>> rare to
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member,
> > JSR
> > > > 363
> > > > > Co
> > > > > >>> Spec
> > > > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion |
> > > Apache
> > > > > >>> >>>> Committer |
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> > > > > @AgoravaProj |
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+
> gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain
> > Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> > > > > Deutschland/Germany
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

@werner:
although i appreciate the commit (if you mean that), it sounded like you
continued with the discussion because you don't agree.
if we have an agreement, we are done. otherwise it needs to be resolved
(independent of a commit).

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-07 21:19 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:

> It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)
>
> Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I guess we
> should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.
>
> Regards,
> Werner
>
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a specific
> > approach.
> > however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or no)
> vs.
> > a generic package-name.
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more
> with
> > EE
> > > 8;-)
> > >
> > > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
> > > standalone app configuration.
> > >
> > > Werner
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was a
> > > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird for
> > > > me as a user.
> > > >
> > > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation
> > like
> > > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> What does Servlet use?
> > > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package
> contains a
> > > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> > > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be
> called
> > > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all
> Java
> > EE
> > > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR
> that
> > > > doesn't
> > > > >> call it something else sticks to.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this
> aspect...CDI,
> > > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses
> > it
> > > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> @rmannibucau
> > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> > > > Groov/Grails;-)
> > > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation",
> > see
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Werner
> > > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
> > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package
> is
> > > > called
> > > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given
> other
> > > > >>> packages
> > > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either
> > > multiple
> > > > >>> teams
> > > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Werner
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> > > werner.keil@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> > > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep
> > "annot"
> > > > for
> > > > >>> >>> now;-)
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> > > aalmiray@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> > > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later
> rename
> > it
> > > > to
> > > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package
> names)
> > > is:
> > > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to
> evolve
> > > the
> > > > >>> API to
> > > > >>> >>>> an
> > > > >>> >>>> stable set
> > > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> > > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> > > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name
> > (my
> > > > vote
> > > > >>> is
> > > > >>> >>>> on
> > > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> > > > >>> >>>> Andres
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> > > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > > > >>> >>>> --
> > > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> > understand
> > > > >>> binary,
> > > > >>> >>>> and
> > > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> > > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
> > > > >>> "binding" or
> > > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version.
> It
> > > also
> > > > >>> >>>> depends on
> > > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft
> this
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > >>> Wiki
> > > > >>> >>>> > than
> > > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
> > annotation;
> > > > What
> > > > >>> I
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I
> think
> > my
> > > > >>> opinion
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
> > > > >>> "annotate"
> > > > >>> >>>> over
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems
> > the
> > > > >>> first
> > > > >>> >>>> one
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> > > annotation".
> > > > >>> Then
> > > > >>> >>>> > theonly
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt
> > > we'll
> > > > >>> get
> > > > >>> >>>> there.
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> > > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field?
> Tamaya
> > > > config
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and
> search
> > > > engine
> > > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old*
> projects/
> > > > which
> > > > >>> >>>> means it
> > > > >>> >>>> > is
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > > >>> >>>> >:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards
> (especially
> > > Java
> > > > >>> SE or
> > > > >>> >>>> EE)
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package
> names
> > > is
> > > > >>> rare to
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member,
> JSR
> > > 363
> > > > Co
> > > > >>> Spec
> > > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion |
> > Apache
> > > > >>> >>>> Committer |
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> > > > @AgoravaProj |
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain
> Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> > > > Deutschland/Germany
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > > >>> >>>> >
> > > > >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

It seems, Anatole already addressed the issue;-)

Whether other forms of package-naming beyond that is desired, I guess we
should do a vote or draft options in the Wiki first?.

Regards,
Werner

On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> wrote:

> in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a specific
> approach.
> however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or no) vs.
> a generic package-name.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more with
> EE
> > 8;-)
> >
> > Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
> > standalone app configuration.
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was a
> > > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird for
> > > me as a user.
> > >
> > > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation
> like
> > > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> What does Servlet use?
> > > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
> > > >>
> > > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
> > > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> > > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
> > > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java
> EE
> > > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that
> > > doesn't
> > > >> call it something else sticks to.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
> > > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses
> it
> > > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> @rmannibucau
> > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> > > Groov/Grails;-)
> > > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation",
> see
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Werner
> > > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is
> > > called
> > > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
> > > >>> packages
> > > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either
> > multiple
> > > >>> teams
> > > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Werner
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> > werner.keil@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> > > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep
> "annot"
> > > for
> > > >>> >>> now;-)
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> > aalmiray@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> > > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename
> it
> > > to
> > > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names)
> > is:
> > > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve
> > the
> > > >>> API to
> > > >>> >>>> an
> > > >>> >>>> stable set
> > > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> > > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> > > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name
> (my
> > > vote
> > > >>> is
> > > >>> >>>> on
> > > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> > > >>> >>>> Andres
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> > > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > > >>> >>>> --
> > > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> understand
> > > >>> binary,
> > > >>> >>>> and
> > > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> > > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
> > > >>> "binding" or
> > > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It
> > also
> > > >>> >>>> depends on
> > > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this
> in
> > > the
> > > >>> Wiki
> > > >>> >>>> > than
> > > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >>>> > >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than
> annotation;
> > > What
> > > >>> I
> > > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think
> my
> > > >>> opinion
> > > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
> > > >>> "annotate"
> > > >>> >>>> over
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems
> the
> > > >>> first
> > > >>> >>>> one
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> > annotation".
> > > >>> Then
> > > >>> >>>> > theonly
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt
> > we'll
> > > >>> get
> > > >>> >>>> there.
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> > > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya
> > > config
> > > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search
> > > engine
> > > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/
> > > which
> > > >>> >>>> means it
> > > >>> >>>> > is
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > > >>> >>>> >:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially
> > Java
> > > >>> SE or
> > > >>> >>>> EE)
> > > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names
> > is
> > > >>> rare to
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR
> > 363
> > > Co
> > > >>> Spec
> > > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion |
> Apache
> > > >>> >>>> Committer |
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> > > @AgoravaProj |
> > > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> > > Deutschland/Germany
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > > >>> >>>> > >>
> > > >>> >>>> >
> > > >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

in many cases you can list x frameworks or specs. which follow a specific
approach.
however, it sounds like we need a vote about using a meaningful (or no) vs.
a generic package-name.

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-07 16:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:

> Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more with EE
> 8;-)
>
> Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
> standalone app configuration.
>
> Werner
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was a
> > miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird for
> > me as a user.
> >
> > CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation like
> > > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> What does Servlet use?
> > >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
> > >>
> > >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
> > >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> > >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
> > >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java EE
> > >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that
> > doesn't
> > >> call it something else sticks to.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
> > >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
> > >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> @rmannibucau
> > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> > Groov/Grails;-)
> > >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> >
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Werner
> > >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is
> > called
> > >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
> > >>> packages
> > >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either
> multiple
> > >>> teams
> > >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Werner
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> > >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot"
> > for
> > >>> >>> now;-)
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <
> aalmiray@gmail.com
> > >
> > >>> >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> > >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it
> > to
> > >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names)
> is:
> > >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve
> the
> > >>> API to
> > >>> >>>> an
> > >>> >>>> stable set
> > >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> > >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> > >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my
> > vote
> > >>> is
> > >>> >>>> on
> > >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> Cheers,
> > >>> >>>> Andres
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> > >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > >>> >>>> --
> > >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> > >>> binary,
> > >>> >>>> and
> > >>> >>>> those who don't.
> > >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >:
> > >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
> > >>> "binding" or
> > >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > >>> >>>> > >
> > >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It
> also
> > >>> >>>> depends on
> > >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in
> > the
> > >>> Wiki
> > >>> >>>> > than
> > >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > >>> >>>> > >
> > >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> > >>> >>>> > >
> > >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation;
> > What
> > >>> I
> > >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my
> > >>> opinion
> > >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> > >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>>
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
> > >>> "annotate"
> > >>> >>>> over
> > >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> > >>> >>>> > >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the
> > >>> first
> > >>> >>>> one
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson
> annotation".
> > >>> Then
> > >>> >>>> > theonly
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt
> we'll
> > >>> get
> > >>> >>>> there.
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> > >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >>> >>>> > >> >:
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya
> > config
> > >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search
> > engine
> > >>> >>>> > friendly.
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/
> > which
> > >>> >>>> means it
> > >>> >>>> > is
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >>> >>>> >:
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially
> Java
> > >>> SE or
> > >>> >>>> EE)
> > >>> >>>> > >> calls
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names
> is
> > >>> rare to
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR
> 363
> > Co
> > >>> Spec
> > >>> >>>> > Lead |
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
> > >>> >>>> Committer |
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> > @AgoravaProj |
> > >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> > Deutschland/Germany
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> > >>> >>>> > >> >>
> > >>> >>>> > >>
> > >>> >>>> >
> > >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Pretty much every Java EE technology does and they'll get even more with EE
8;-)

Hence it makes sense for a project that also aims at EE aside from
standalone app configuration.

Werner

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was a
> miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird for
> me as a user.
>
> CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation like
> > ManagedBean, etc.;-)
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> What does Servlet use?
> >> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
> >>
> >> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
> >> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> >> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
> >> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java EE
> >> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that
> doesn't
> >> call it something else sticks to.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
> >>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
> >>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> @rmannibucau
> >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of
> Groov/Grails;-)
> >>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
> >>> >
> >>>
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Werner
> >>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is
> called
> >>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
> >>> packages
> >>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple
> >>> teams
> >>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Werner
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> >>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot"
> for
> >>> >>> now;-)
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com
> >
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> >>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it
> to
> >>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
> >>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the
> >>> API to
> >>> >>>> an
> >>> >>>> stable set
> >>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> >>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> >>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my
> vote
> >>> is
> >>> >>>> on
> >>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Cheers,
> >>> >>>> Andres
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>> >>>> --
> >>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> >>> binary,
> >>> >>>> and
> >>> >>>> those who don't.
> >>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
> >>> "binding" or
> >>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> >>> >>>> > >
> >>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
> >>> >>>> depends on
> >>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in
> the
> >>> Wiki
> >>> >>>> > than
> >>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> >>> >>>> > >
> >>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> > > wrote:
> >>> >>>> > >
> >>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation;
> What
> >>> I
> >>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my
> >>> opinion
> >>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> >>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> >>> >>>> > >> >
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>>
> >>>
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> >>> >>>> > >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
> >>> "annotate"
> >>> >>>> over
> >>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> >>> >>>> > >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> > Werner
> >>> >>>> > >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> >>> >>>> > >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the
> >>> first
> >>> >>>> one
> >>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation".
> >>> Then
> >>> >>>> > theonly
> >>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll
> >>> get
> >>> >>>> there.
> >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>> >>>> > >> >:
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya
> config
> >>> >>>> > >> annotations
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search
> engine
> >>> >>>> > friendly.
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/
> which
> >>> >>>> means it
> >>> >>>> > is
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>> >>>> >:
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java
> >>> SE or
> >>> >>>> EE)
> >>> >>>> > >> calls
> >>> >>>> > >> >> it
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is
> >>> rare to
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363
> Co
> >>> Spec
> >>> >>>> > Lead |
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
> >>> >>>> Committer |
> >>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 |
> @AgoravaProj |
> >>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > --
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin,
> Deutschland/Germany
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >>> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>> >>>> > >> >>
> >>> >>>> > >>
> >>> >>>> >
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

servlet uses annotation package not sure why. For me either it was a
miss or just a "put all in a new package" idea but it looks weird for
me as a user.

CDI uses javax.annotation cause CDI didnt have the choice


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 21:39 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation like
> ManagedBean, etc.;-)
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What does Servlet use?
>> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
>>
>> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
>> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
>> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
>> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java EE
>> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that doesn't
>> call it something else sticks to.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
>>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
>>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of Groov/Grails;-)
>>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
>>> >
>>> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Werner
>>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
>>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
>>> packages
>>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple
>>> teams
>>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
>>> >>
>>> >> Werner
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
>>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for
>>> >>> now;-)
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
>>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the
>>> API to
>>> >>>> an
>>> >>>> stable set
>>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote
>>> is
>>> >>>> on
>>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Cheers,
>>> >>>> Andres
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>>> binary,
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> those who don't.
>>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
>>> "binding" or
>>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
>>> >>>> depends on
>>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the
>>> Wiki
>>> >>>> > than
>>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> > >
>>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What
>>> I
>>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my
>>> opinion
>>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>>> >>>> > >> >
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>>
>>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>>> >>>> > >> >
>>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
>>> "annotate"
>>> >>>> over
>>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>>> >>>> > >> >
>>> >>>> > >> > Werner
>>> >>>> > >> >
>>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
>>> >>>> > >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the
>>> first
>>> >>>> one
>>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation".
>>> Then
>>> >>>> > theonly
>>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll
>>> get
>>> >>>> there.
>>> >>>> > >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> >>>> > >> >:
>>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>>> >>>> > >> annotations
>>> >>>> > >> >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
>>> >>>> > friendly.
>>> >>>> > >> >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
>>> >>>> > >> >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which
>>> >>>> means it
>>> >>>> > is
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>>> >>>> >:
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java
>>> SE or
>>> >>>> EE)
>>> >>>> > >> calls
>>> >>>> > >> >> it
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is
>>> rare to
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co
>>> Spec
>>> >>>> > Lead |
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
>>> >>>> Committer |
>>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> >>>> > >> >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >> > --
>>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>>> >>>> > >> >> >
>>> >>>> > >> >>
>>> >>>> > >>
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Don't forget, CDI uses all these annotations from javax.annotation like
ManagedBean, etc.;-)

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What does Servlet use?
> Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)
>
> "faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
> plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
> Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
> "javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java EE
> standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that doesn't
> call it something else sticks to.
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
>> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
>> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of Groov/Grails;-)
>> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
>> >
>> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
>> >
>> >
>> > Werner
>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
>> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
>> packages
>> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple
>> teams
>> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
>> >>
>> >> Werner
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
>> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for
>> >>> now;-)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
>> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the
>> API to
>> >>>> an
>> >>>> stable set
>> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote
>> is
>> >>>> on
>> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>> Andres
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -------------------------------------------
>> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>> binary,
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> those who don't.
>> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> > @rmannibucau
>> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages
>> "binding" or
>> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
>> >>>> depends on
>> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the
>> Wiki
>> >>>> > than
>> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>> > > wrote:
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What
>> I
>> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my
>> opinion
>> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>> >>>> > >> >
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>> >>>> > >> >
>> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name
>> "annotate"
>> >>>> over
>> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>> >>>> > >> >
>> >>>> > >> > Werner
>> >>>> > >> >
>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>> > >> > wrote:
>> >>>> > >> >
>> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the
>> first
>> >>>> one
>> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation".
>> Then
>> >>>> > theonly
>> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll
>> get
>> >>>> there.
>> >>>> > >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>>> > >> >:
>> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>> >>>> > >> annotations
>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
>> >>>> > friendly.
>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which
>> >>>> means it
>> >>>> > is
>> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>
>> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >>>> >:
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java
>> SE or
>> >>>> EE)
>> >>>> > >> calls
>> >>>> > >> >> it
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is
>> rare to
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co
>> Spec
>> >>>> > Lead |
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
>> >>>> Committer |
>> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> > >> >> >>>
>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> >>>> > >> >> > --
>> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >>>> > >> >> >
>> >>>> > >> >>
>> >>>> > >>
>> >>>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

What does Servlet use?
Aside from being called "javax.servlet" not  "javax.servlets";-)

"faces" is among the few Java standards where the package contains a
plural, but it's part of the standard name, so it makes sense.
Then again, the JSF package "javax.faces.component" could be called
"javax.faces.components", so it's singular for pretty much all Java EE
standards, especially the "annotation" package which every JSR that doesn't
call it something else sticks to.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
> JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
> but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of Groov/Grails;-)
> > Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
> >
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
> >
> >
> > Werner
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
> >> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other
> packages
> >> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple
> teams
> >> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
> >>
> >> Werner
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> >>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for
> >>> now;-)
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> >>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
> >>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
> >>>>
> >>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
> >>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API
> to
> >>>> an
> >>>> stable set
> >>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
> >>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
> >>>>  - rinse and repeat.
> >>>>
> >>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote
> is
> >>>> on
> >>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Andres
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>>> --
> >>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary,
> >>>> and
> >>>> those who don't.
> >>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> > @rmannibucau
> >>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding"
> or
> >>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
> >>>> depends on
> >>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the
> Wiki
> >>>> > than
> >>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>> > > wrote:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
> >>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my
> opinion
> >>>> > >> is clear now :)
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> > >> @rmannibucau
> >>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> >>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> >>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate"
> >>>> over
> >>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> >>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >> > Werner
> >>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>> > >> > wrote:
> >>>> > >> >
> >>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first
> >>>> one
> >>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
> >>>> > theonly
> >>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get
> >>>> there.
> >>>> > >> >>
> >>>> > >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> >>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>> > >> >>
> >>>> > >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>>> > >> >:
> >>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
> >>>> > >> annotations
> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
> >>>> > friendly.
> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>>> > >> >> > Oliver
> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which
> >>>> means it
> >>>> > is
> >>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> >>
> >>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>>> >:
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE
> or
> >>>> EE)
> >>>> > >> calls
> >>>> > >> >> it
> >>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is
> rare to
> >>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co
> Spec
> >>>> > Lead |
> >>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
> >>>> Committer |
> >>>> > >> >> Advisory
> >>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
> >>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
> >>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> >>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> >>>> > >> >> >>>
> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>>> > >> >> > --
> >>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >>>> > >> >> >
> >>>> > >> >>
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

spring is far to be a modern framework regarding this aspect...CDI,
JAX-RS, BeanValidation, JTA, JPA etc...don't use it. Servlet uses it
but surely something missed in EG (at least @EE level).


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 21:20 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of Groov/Grails;-)
> Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
> http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description
>
>
> Werner
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
>> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other packages
>> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple teams
>> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
>>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for
>>> now;-)
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
>>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>>>>
>>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to
>>>> an
>>>> stable set
>>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>>>>  - rinse and repeat.
>>>>
>>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is
>>>> on
>>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Andres
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>>> --
>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>>>> and
>>>> those who don't.
>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > @rmannibucau
>>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
>>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
>>>> depends on
>>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki
>>>> > than
>>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
>>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
>>>> > >> is clear now :)
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > >> @rmannibucau
>>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>>>> > >> >
>>>> > >>
>>>> >
>>>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>>>> > >> >
>>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate"
>>>> over
>>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>>>> > >> >
>>>> > >> > Werner
>>>> > >> >
>>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> > >> > wrote:
>>>> > >> >
>>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first
>>>> one
>>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
>>>> > theonly
>>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get
>>>> there.
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>>> > >> >:
>>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>>>> > >> annotations
>>>> > >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
>>>> > friendly.
>>>> > >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> > Oliver
>>>> > >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which
>>>> means it
>>>> > is
>>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >>
>>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>>>> >:
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or
>>>> EE)
>>>> > >> calls
>>>> > >> >> it
>>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec
>>>> > Lead |
>>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
>>>> Committer |
>>>> > >> >> Advisory
>>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>>>> > >> >> >>>
>>>> > >> >> >
>>>> > >> >> > --
>>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>>>> > >> >> >
>>>> > >> >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Speaking of pseudo- or de-facto-standard (or the home of Groov/Grails;-)
Spring Framework also calls these packages always "annotation", see
http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/package-summary.html#package.description


Werner
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
> "annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other packages
> are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple teams
> worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)
>
> Werner
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
>> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for
>> now;-)
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
>>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>>>
>>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to
>>> an
>>> stable set
>>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>>>  - rinse and repeat.
>>>
>>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is
>>> on
>>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andres
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>> --
>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>>> and
>>> those who don't.
>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau
>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
>>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>>> > >
>>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
>>> depends on
>>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki
>>> > than
>>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>>> > >
>>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
>>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
>>> > >> is clear now :)
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >> @rmannibucau
>>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate"
>>> over
>>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Werner
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> > >> > wrote:
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first
>>> one
>>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
>>> > theonly
>>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get
>>> there.
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> > >> >:
>>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>>> > >> annotations
>>> > >> >> >
>>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
>>> > friendly.
>>> > >> >> >
>>> > >> >> > Oliver
>>> > >> >> >
>>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>>> > >> >> >>
>>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which
>>> means it
>>> > is
>>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>>> > >> >> >>
>>> > >> >> >>
>>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> > >> >> >>
>>> > >> >> >>
>>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>>> >:
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or
>>> EE)
>>> > >> calls
>>> > >> >> it
>>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec
>>> > Lead |
>>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache
>>> Committer |
>>> > >> >> Advisory
>>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>>> > >> >> >>>
>>> > >> >> >
>>> > >> >> > --
>>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>>> > >> >> >
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Hibernate seems to be among the few cases where such package is called
"annotations", but then it is not really consistent, given other packages
are called "exception" rather than "exceptions". So either multiple teams
worked on those or names were picked pretty randomly;-)

Werner

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
> Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for now;-)
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
>> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
>> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>>
>> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to
>> an
>> stable set
>>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>>  - rinse and repeat.
>>
>> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is on
>> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andres
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> --
>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>> and
>> those who don't.
>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>> >
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
>> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>> > >
>> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also
>> depends on
>> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki
>> > than
>> > > an endless thread?;-)
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
>> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
>> > >> is clear now :)
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >> @rmannibucau
>> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate"
>> over
>> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Werner
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > >> > wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
>> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
>> > theonly
>> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get
>> there.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >> >> @rmannibucau
>> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > >> >:
>> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>> > >> annotations
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
>> > friendly.
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > Oliver
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>> > >> >> >>
>> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means
>> it
>> > is
>> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>> > >> >> >>
>> > >> >> >>
>> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
>> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >> >> >>
>> > >> >> >>
>> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >:
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or
>> EE)
>> > >> calls
>> > >> >> it
>> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec
>> > Lead |
>> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer
>> |
>> > >> >> Advisory
>> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>> > >> @DeviceMap |
>> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
>> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>> > >> >> >>> wrote:
>> > >> >> >>>
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >> > --
>> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Why "annotations" not "annotation"?
Of course if we plan to change it, we might as well keep "annot" for now;-)

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
> This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
> something that fits the behavior better based on experience.
>
> My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
>  - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to an
> stable set
>  - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
>  - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
>  - rinse and repeat.
>
> Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is on
> annotations and move on to the next topic)
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> --
> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
> those who don't.
> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
> > > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> > >
> > > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also depends
> on
> > > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki
> > than
> > > an endless thread?;-)
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
> > >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
> > >> is clear now :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau
> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> > >> >
> > >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
> > >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> > >> >
> > >> > Werner
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
> > >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
> > theonly
> > >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get
> there.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> > o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >> >:
> > >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
> > >> annotations
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
> > friendly.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Oliver
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means
> it
> > is
> > >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> > >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or
> EE)
> > >> calls
> > >> >> it
> > >> >> >>> "annotation".
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
> > >> >> >>> non-existent.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec
> > Lead |
> > >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
> > >> >> Advisory
> > >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
> > >> @DeviceMap |
> > >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> > >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> > >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> > >> >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > --
> > >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> > >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> > >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>]

I'd rather be pragmatic and use "annotations" right away.
This way we can get a feeling of the API. We can later rename it to
something that fits the behavior better based on experience.

My policy for making breaking changes (such as package names) is:
 - break as much as you can during pre 1.0 in order to evolve the API to an
stable set
 - deprecate after 1.0, provide parallel names as needed.
 - remove deprecations is next big release (2.0)
 - rinse and repeat.

Given that we're just getting started I'd say pick one name (my vote is on
annotations and move on to the next topic)

Cheers,
Andres

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://jroller.com/aalmiray
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
> > whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
> >
> > There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also depends on
> > what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki
> than
> > an endless thread?;-)
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
> >> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
> >> is clear now :)
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> >> >
> >>
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> >> >
> >> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
> >> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> >> >
> >> > Werner
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
> >> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then
> theonly
> >> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >:
> >> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
> >> annotations
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine
> friendly.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Oliver
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it
> is
> >> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE)
> >> calls
> >> >> it
> >> >> >>> "annotation".
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
> >> >> >>> non-existent.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec
> Lead |
> >> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
> >> >> Advisory
> >> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
> >> @DeviceMap |
> >> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >> >> >>> | #DevOps
> >> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

I think we implicitely wait for some more proposals no?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 20:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
> whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?
>
> There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also depends on
> what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki than
> an endless thread?;-)
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
>> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
>> is clear now :)
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
>> >
>> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>> >
>> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
>> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>> >
>> > Werner
>> >
>> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
>> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then theonly
>> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >:
>> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
>> annotations
>> >> >
>> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
>> >> >
>> >> > Oliver
>> >> >
>> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
>> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE)
>> calls
>> >> it
>> >> >>> "annotation".
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>> >> >>> non-existent.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
>> >> Advisory
>> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
>> @DeviceMap |
>> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>> >> >>> | #DevOps
>> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >> > P +49 30 44793251
>> >> > M +49 178 7903538
>> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >> >
>> >>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

OK, so it's still about calling one or several packages "binding" or
whatever and not use an "annot*" one at all?

There have been a couple of +1 for the longer version. It also depends on
what useful packages would be, maybe better to draft this in the Wiki than
an endless thread?;-)

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
> meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
> is clear now :)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> >
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
> >
> > Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
> > "annotation" or "annotations";-)
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
> >> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then theonly
> >>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >:
> >> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config
> annotations
> >> >
> >> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
> >> >
> >> > Oliver
> >> >
> >> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> >> >>
> >> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
> >> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE)
> calls
> >> it
> >> >>> "annotation".
> >> >>>
> >> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
> >> >>> non-existent.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
> >> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
> >> Advisory
> >> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj |
> @DeviceMap |
> >> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >> >>> | #DevOps
> >> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

but google gives more inputs with binding than annotation; What I
meant is annotation is quite neutral today. Well I think my opinion
is clear now :)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 20:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
> http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html
>
> Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
> "annotation" or "annotations";-)
>
> Werner
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
>> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then theonly
>>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
>> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config annotations
>> >
>> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
>> >
>> > Oliver
>> >
>> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>> >>
>> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
>> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>>
>> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls
>> it
>> >>> "annotation".
>> >>>
>> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>> >>> non-existent.
>> >>>
>> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
>> Advisory
>> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
>> >>>
>> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
>> >>> #EclipseUOMo
>> >>> | #DevOps
>> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > P +49 30 44793251
>> > M +49 178 7903538
>> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Jackson DataBind also calls it "annotation"
http://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-databind/javadoc/2.2.0/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/annotation/package-frame.html

Some other Jackson APIs even prefer the package name "annotate" over
"annotation" or "annotations";-)

Werner

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> "hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
> wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then theonly
>  challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config annotations
> >
> > So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
> >
> > Oliver
> >
> > Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> >>
> >> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
> >> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>
> >>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls
> it
> >>> "annotation".
> >>>
> >>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
> >>> non-existent.
> >>>
> >>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
> >>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer |
> Advisory
> >>> Board Member, DWX '15
> >>>
> >>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
> >>> #EclipseUOMo
> >>> | #DevOps
> >>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> <rm...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

"hibernate mapping" vs "hibernate annotation", seems the first one
wins. Same for "jackson binding" vs "jackson annotation". Then theonly
 challenge is to have a good doc but I have no doubt we'll get there.


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 20:23 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config annotations
>
> So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
>
> Oliver
>
> Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>>
>> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
>> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
>>> "annotation".
>>>
>>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>>> non-existent.
>>>
>>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
>>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>>
>>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
>>> #EclipseUOMo
>>> | #DevOps
>>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> <rm...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

In most cases you'd enter "Tamaya JavaDoc" or something.

The new Lambda package used to be named "java.util.functions" in
pre-releases of Java 8 but was then renamed  to the singular version
"java.util.function"

Anyway, unless we keep the cropped version after all something like a
survey could work here (a few already did +1 in this thread, not sure, if
someone wanted to do this more fomally)

Werner

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>
wrote:

> What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config annotations
>
> So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.
>
> Oliver
>
> Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>
>> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
>> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
>>> "annotation".
>>>
>>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
>>> non-existent.
>>>
>>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
>>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>>
>>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
>>> #EclipseUOMo
>>> | #DevOps
>>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

What do I enter into the Google search field? Tamaya config annotations

So, having a annotations package is user and search engine friendly.

Oliver

Am 06.12.14 um 20:07 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
>> "annotation".
>>
>> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to non-existent.
>>
>> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
>> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
>> Board Member, DWX '15
>>
>> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
>> #EclipseUOMo
>> | #DevOps
>> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

If they are part of the Java EE Standard, then calling it "old" means you'd
rather abandon a standard and create your own pseudo-standard?;-)

You won't see somebody just throwing random annotations into a "new"
package "javax.enterprise.annotations" just because a few people might find
"annotations" more hip or sexy now.

Werner

On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
> surely time to stop following blindly others ;)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
> > "annotation".
> >
> > With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to
> non-existent.
> >
> > Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
> > Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
> > Board Member, DWX '15
> >
> > Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
> > #EclipseUOMo
> > | #DevOps
> > Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> annotation or annotations? :p.
> >>
> >> More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> >> @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
> >> and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >:
> >> > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> >
> >> > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> >>
> >> >> full name is really better.
> >> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> you'll
> >> >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >>> too.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Werner
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

s/majority of projects/majority of *old* projects/ which means it is
surely time to stop following blindly others ;)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 20:04 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
> "annotation".
>
> With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to non-existent.
>
> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
> Board Member, DWX '15
>
> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
> #EclipseUOMo
> | #DevOps
> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> annotation or annotations? :p.
>>
>> More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
>> @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
>> and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
>> > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>> >
>> > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>> >>
>> >> full name is really better.
>> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> you'll
>> >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >>>
>> >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >>> too.
>> >>>
>> >>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >>>
>> >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >>>
>> >>> Werner
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > P +49 30 44793251
>> > M +49 178 7903538
>> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

The majority of projects or standards (especially Java SE or EE) calls it
"annotation".

With very few exceptions, plural for package names is rare to non-existent.

Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead |
Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory
Board Member, DWX '15

Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @DeviceMap |
#EclipseUOMo
| #DevOps
Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> annotation or annotations? :p.
>
> More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
> and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >
> > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >>
> >> full name is really better.
> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> you'll
> >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>>
> >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >>> too.
> >>>
> >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>>
> >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>>
> >>> Werner
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

Agreed!
Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
11:00:

> yep but in cdi you can't use the non cdi case cause of proxies etc,
> that's why this compromise looks acceptable to me
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 10:49 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> > Feasible variant, other opinions? Imo we should ensure that in cdi/non
> cdi
> > case as much as possible the same code is running.
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014
> um
> > 10:40:
> >
> >> IIRC we can add @Qualifier etc programmatically.
> >>
> >> here is the proposal:
> >>
> >> - cdi public void listeneConfigChange(@Observes @Config("org.foo" /*
> >> are, property...*/) ConfigUpdate event)
> >> - embedded public void listeneConfigChange(@Config("org.foo" /* are,
> >> property...*/) ConfigUpdate event) //  here public + 1 param
> >> ConfigUpdate decorated with @Config = listener method
> >>
> >> for the embedded case a spi + a register method would make sense fo rme
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 10:27 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <an...@apache.org>:
> >> > Reading again I would really encourage to write a short proposal ;) I
> >> think
> >> > we are not far away from each other...
> >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> > From: Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>
> >> > Date: Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um 10:25
> >> > Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
> >> > To: <de...@tamaya.incubator.apache.org>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
> >> > qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to
> each
> >> > observer.
> >> > Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the
> Qualifier
> >> > meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
> >> > And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
> >> > similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it
> clearer
> >> in
> >> > a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
> >> > Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to
> build
> >> it
> >> > on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and
> ensure it
> >> > interoperates with cdi, java ee well.
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only).
> I
> >> am
> >> > not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)
> >> >
> >> > Chees
> >> > Anatole
> >> > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez.
> 2014
> >> um
> >> > 10:02:
> >> >
> >> > actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
> >> >> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
> >> >> property...
> >> >>
> >> >> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
> >> >> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener)
> .
> >> >>
> >> >> wdyt?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably
> >> parts
> >> >> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI
> >> 2.0),
> >> >> I
> >> >> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
> >> >> feature.
> >> >> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI
> >> bus/to
> >> >> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way,
> where I
> >> >> can
> >> >> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both
> the
> >> >> nice
> >> >> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components
> >> that
> >> >> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering
> >> event
> >> >> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework".
> Standalone
> >> >> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
> >> >> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
> >> >> >> listener interface...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as
> >> with
> >> >> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably
> >> not be
> >> >> >> 100%
> >> >> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
> >> >> informed on
> >> >> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
> >> >> system). I
> >> >> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be
> >> since I
> >> >> >> knew
> >> >> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we
> could
> >> also
> >> >> >> call
> >> >> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can
> use
> >> an
> >> >> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
> >> >> >> integrate
> >> >> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and
> the
> >> >> config
> >> >> >> >> object instance.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Wdyt?
> >> >> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a
> >> écrit
> >> >> :
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Hi all
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*,
> based on
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met
> that
> >> >> looks
> >> >> >> >> good.
> >> >> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might
> reconsider
> >> >> adding
> >> >> >> an
> >> >> >> >> > additional one.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Anatole
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for
> >> @ConfiguredX,
> >> >> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
> >> >> >> intuitive -
> >> >> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> >> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
> >> >> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
> >> >> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> >> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> >> >> > > you'll
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> too.
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>> Werner
> >> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > > > --
> >> >> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

yep but in cdi you can't use the non cdi case cause of proxies etc,
that's why this compromise looks acceptable to me


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 10:49 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> Feasible variant, other opinions? Imo we should ensure that in cdi/non cdi
> case as much as possible the same code is running.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
> 10:40:
>
>> IIRC we can add @Qualifier etc programmatically.
>>
>> here is the proposal:
>>
>> - cdi public void listeneConfigChange(@Observes @Config("org.foo" /*
>> are, property...*/) ConfigUpdate event)
>> - embedded public void listeneConfigChange(@Config("org.foo" /* are,
>> property...*/) ConfigUpdate event) //  here public + 1 param
>> ConfigUpdate decorated with @Config = listener method
>>
>> for the embedded case a spi + a register method would make sense fo rme
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 10:27 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <an...@apache.org>:
>> > Reading again I would really encourage to write a short proposal ;) I
>> think
>> > we are not far away from each other...
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > From: Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>
>> > Date: Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um 10:25
>> > Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
>> > To: <de...@tamaya.incubator.apache.org>
>> >
>> >
>> > Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
>> > qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to each
>> > observer.
>> > Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the Qualifier
>> > meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
>> > And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
>> > similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it clearer
>> in
>> > a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
>> > Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to build
>> it
>> > on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and ensure it
>> > interoperates with cdi, java ee well.
>> >
>> > Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only). I
>> am
>> > not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)
>> >
>> > Chees
>> > Anatole
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014
>> um
>> > 10:02:
>> >
>> > actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
>> >> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
>> >> property...
>> >>
>> >> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
>> >> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).
>> >>
>> >> wdyt?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
>> >> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably
>> parts
>> >> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI
>> 2.0),
>> >> I
>> >> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
>> >> feature.
>> >> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI
>> bus/to
>> >> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I
>> >> can
>> >> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the
>> >> nice
>> >> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components
>> that
>> >> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering
>> event
>> >> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
>> >> >
>> >> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
>> >> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
>> >> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
>> >> >> listener interface...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as
>> with
>> >> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably
>> not be
>> >> >> 100%
>> >> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
>> >> informed on
>> >> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
>> >> system). I
>> >> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be
>> since I
>> >> >> knew
>> >> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could
>> also
>> >> >> call
>> >> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use
>> an
>> >> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
>> >> >> integrate
>> >> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the
>> >> config
>> >> >> >> object instance.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Wdyt?
>> >> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a
>> écrit
>> >> :
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hi all
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on
>> >> the
>> >> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that
>> >> looks
>> >> >> >> good.
>> >> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider
>> >> adding
>> >> >> an
>> >> >> >> > additional one.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Anatole
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >> >> >:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for
>> @ConfiguredX,
>> >> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
>> >> >> intuitive -
>> >> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
>> >> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> >> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> >> >> >:
>> >> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>> >> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
>> >> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
>> >> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> >> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >> >> >> > > you'll
>> >> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> >> >> > > >>> too.
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>> Werner
>> >> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > --
>> >> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
>> >> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
>> >> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >
>> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >
>> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

Feasible variant, other opinions? Imo we should ensure that in cdi/non cdi
case as much as possible the same code is running.


Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
10:40:

> IIRC we can add @Qualifier etc programmatically.
>
> here is the proposal:
>
> - cdi public void listeneConfigChange(@Observes @Config("org.foo" /*
> are, property...*/) ConfigUpdate event)
> - embedded public void listeneConfigChange(@Config("org.foo" /* are,
> property...*/) ConfigUpdate event) //  here public + 1 param
> ConfigUpdate decorated with @Config = listener method
>
> for the embedded case a spi + a register method would make sense fo rme
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 10:27 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <an...@apache.org>:
> > Reading again I would really encourage to write a short proposal ;) I
> think
> > we are not far away from each other...
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um 10:25
> > Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
> > To: <de...@tamaya.incubator.apache.org>
> >
> >
> > Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
> > qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to each
> > observer.
> > Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the Qualifier
> > meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
> > And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
> > similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it clearer
> in
> > a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
> > Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to build
> it
> > on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and ensure it
> > interoperates with cdi, java ee well.
> >
> > Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only). I
> am
> > not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)
> >
> > Chees
> > Anatole
> > Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014
> um
> > 10:02:
> >
> > actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
> >> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
> >> property...
> >>
> >> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
> >> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).
> >>
> >> wdyt?
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably
> parts
> >> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI
> 2.0),
> >> I
> >> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
> >> feature.
> >> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI
> bus/to
> >> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I
> >> can
> >> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the
> >> nice
> >> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components
> that
> >> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering
> event
> >> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
> >> >
> >> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
> >> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
> >> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
> >> >> listener interface...
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> @rmannibucau
> >> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as
> with
> >> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably
> not be
> >> >> 100%
> >> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
> >> informed on
> >> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
> >> system). I
> >> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be
> since I
> >> >> knew
> >> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could
> also
> >> >> call
> >> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
> >> >> >
> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use
> an
> >> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
> >> >> integrate
> >> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the
> >> config
> >> >> >> object instance.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Wdyt?
> >> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a
> écrit
> >> :
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hi all
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on
> >> the
> >> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that
> >> looks
> >> >> >> good.
> >> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider
> >> adding
> >> >> an
> >> >> >> > additional one.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Anatole
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for
> @ConfiguredX,
> >> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
> >> >> intuitive -
> >> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
> >> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >> >:
> >> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
> >> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
> >> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> >> > > you'll
> >> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> >> > > >>> too.
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Werner
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > > --
> >> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >
> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >
> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

IIRC we can add @Qualifier etc programmatically.

here is the proposal:

- cdi public void listeneConfigChange(@Observes @Config("org.foo" /*
are, property...*/) ConfigUpdate event)
- embedded public void listeneConfigChange(@Config("org.foo" /* are,
property...*/) ConfigUpdate event) //  here public + 1 param
ConfigUpdate decorated with @Config = listener method

for the embedded case a spi + a register method would make sense fo rme


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 10:27 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <an...@apache.org>:
> Reading again I would really encourage to write a short proposal ;) I think
> we are not far away from each other...
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>
> Date: Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um 10:25
> Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
> To: <de...@tamaya.incubator.apache.org>
>
>
> Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
> qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to each
> observer.
> Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the Qualifier
> meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
> And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
> similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it clearer in
> a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
> Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to build it
> on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and ensure it
> interoperates with cdi, java ee well.
>
> Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only). I am
> not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)
>
> Chees
> Anatole
> Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
> 10:02:
>
> actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
>> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
>> property...
>>
>> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
>> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).
>>
>> wdyt?
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
>> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably parts
>> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI 2.0),
>> I
>> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
>> feature.
>> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI bus/to
>> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I
>> can
>> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the
>> nice
>> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components that
>> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering event
>> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
>> >
>> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
>> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
>> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
>> >> listener interface...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau
>> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
>> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
>> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be
>> >> 100%
>> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
>> informed on
>> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
>> system). I
>> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I
>> >> knew
>> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also
>> >> call
>> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
>> >> >
>> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >
>> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
>> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
>> >> integrate
>> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the
>> config
>> >> >> object instance.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Wdyt?
>> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit
>> :
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hi all
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on
>> the
>> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that
>> looks
>> >> >> good.
>> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider
>> adding
>> >> an
>> >> >> > additional one.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Anatole
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >> >:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
>> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
>> >> intuitive -
>> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
>> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> >> >:
>> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
>> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
>> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > >> wrote:
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >> >> > > you'll
>> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> >> > > >>> too.
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>> Werner
>> >> >> > > >>>
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >>
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > --
>> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
>> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
>> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >
>> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >
>> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> > Glärnischweg 10
>> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >
>> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >
>> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>>

Fwd: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <an...@apache.org>]

Reading again I would really encourage to write a short proposal ;) I think
we are not far away from each other...
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>
Date: Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um 10:25
Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
To: <de...@tamaya.incubator.apache.org>


Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to each
observer.
Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the Qualifier
meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it clearer in
a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to build it
on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and ensure it
interoperates with cdi, java ee well.

Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only). I am
not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)

Chees
Anatole
Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
10:02:

actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
> property...
>
> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).
>
> wdyt?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably parts
> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI 2.0),
> I
> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
> feature.
> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI bus/to
> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I
> can
> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the
> nice
> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components that
> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering event
> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
> >
> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
> >> listener interface...
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be
> >> 100%
> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
> informed on
> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
> system). I
> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I
> >> knew
> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also
> >> call
> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
> >> >
> >> > WDYT?
> >> >
> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
> >> integrate
> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the
> config
> >> >> object instance.
> >> >>
> >> >> Wdyt?
> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit
> :
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi all
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on
> the
> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that
> looks
> >> >> good.
> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider
> adding
> >> an
> >> >> > additional one.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anatole
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
> >> intuitive -
> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >:
> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> > > you'll
> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> > > >>> too.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Werner
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > --
> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >
> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >
> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Anatole Tresch*
> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> > Glärnischweg 10
> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >
> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >
> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

Sure? A @Config qualifier cannot be isolated (without additional
qualifiers), so given 2 configurations all change events sre sent to each
observer.
Additionally using a qualifier adds a dependency to cdi for the Qualifier
meta annotation. Given that we are at square. 0 again: diy...
And last I think it is not good to reinvent cdi (though some
similarities/intersections cannot be avoided. Also this makes it clearer in
a cdi context, which functionality is provided by which part.
Finally Imo config is a more general concept. We should not try to build it
on top of cdi, but use the parterns like ioc/events as well and ensure it
interoperates with cdi, java ee well.

Perhaps you can do a short code proposal here on the mail (api only). I am
not sure if all people here on the list are so familiar with cdi...;)

Chees
Anatole
Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 6. Dez. 2014 um
10:02:

> actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
> qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
> property...
>
> Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
> way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).
>
> wdyt?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> > I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably parts
> > of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI 2.0),
> I
> > would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related
> feature.
> > We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI bus/to
> > Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I
> can
> > evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the
> nice
> > features for configuration and seemless integration for components that
> > want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering event
> > listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
> >
> > 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
> >> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
> >> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
> >> listener interface...
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> >> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
> >> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be
> >> 100%
> >> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only
> informed on
> >> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the
> system). I
> >> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I
> >> knew
> >> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also
> >> call
> >> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
> >> >
> >> > WDYT?
> >> >
> >> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
> >> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
> >> integrate
> >> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the
> config
> >> >> object instance.
> >> >>
> >> >> Wdyt?
> >> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit
> :
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi all
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on
> the
> >> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that
> looks
> >> >> good.
> >> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider
> adding
> >> an
> >> >> > additional one.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > WDYT?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anatole
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> >> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
> >> intuitive -
> >> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> > > @rmannibucau
> >> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> >:
> >> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> full name is really better.
> >> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
> >> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>> Hi,
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> > > you'll
> >> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> >> > > >>> too.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>> Werner
> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > --
> >> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >
> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >
> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Anatole Tresch*
> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> > Glärnischweg 10
> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >
> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >
> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

actually with CDI 1.0 we can already do advanced things using a Config
qualifier so we can send the event to listeners of 1 bean, 1 area, 1
property...

Only issue is: how do we do in standalone. I would design it the same
way but without the @Observes (= need configBus.register(myListener).

wdyt?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 9:47 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably parts
> of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI 2.0), I
> would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related feature.
> We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI bus/to
> Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I can
> evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the nice
> features for configuration and seemless integration for components that
> want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering event
> listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...
>
> 2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
>> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
>> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
>> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
>> listener interface...
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
>> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
>> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be
>> 100%
>> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only informed on
>> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the system). I
>> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I
>> knew
>> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also
>> call
>> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
>> >
>> > WDYT?
>> >
>> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
>> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
>> integrate
>> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the config
>> >> object instance.
>> >>
>> >> Wdyt?
>> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> > Hi all
>> >> >
>> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
>> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks
>> >> good.
>> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding
>> an
>> >> > additional one.
>> >> >
>> >> > WDYT?
>> >> >
>> >> > Anatole
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >:
>> >> >
>> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
>> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
>> intuitive -
>> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> > > @rmannibucau
>> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> >:
>> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> full name is really better.
>> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >> >
>> >> > > >> wrote:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>> Hi,
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >> > > you'll
>> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> >> > > >>> too.
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>> Werner
>> >> > > >>>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > --
>> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
>> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
>> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> >> > Glärnischweg 10
>> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >> >
>> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >> >
>> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> > Glärnischweg 10
>> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >
>> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >
>> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Anatole Tresch*
> Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> Glärnischweg 10
> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>
> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>
> *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

I know ;) Looking at the integration with CDI, where we do probably parts
of the injection ourself (especially to support CDI earlier to CDI 2.0), I
would propose @ConfigUpdate (working title) to be a config related feature.
We can additionally publish any *ConfigChange *events on the CDI bus/to
Spring listeners. *ConfigChange *is already designed in a way, where I can
evaluate, which config is affected. That way I think we have both the nice
features for configuration and seemless integration for components that
want to listen on the "standard" event buses. If we get filtering event
listeners in CDI 2.0 we might have additional possibilities open...

2014-12-06 9:40 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
> -> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
> management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
> listener interface...
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> > I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
> > CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be
> 100%
> > similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only informed on
> > config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the system). I
> > also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I
> knew
> > we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also
> call
> > it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
> >> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to
> integrate
> >> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the config
> >> object instance.
> >>
> >> Wdyt?
> >> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> > Hi all
> >> >
> >> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
> >> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks
> >> good.
> >> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding
> an
> >> > additional one.
> >> >
> >> > WDYT?
> >> >
> >> > Anatole
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >:
> >> >
> >> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >> > >
> >> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> >> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more
> intuitive -
> >> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > @rmannibucau
> >> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >:
> >> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> full name is really better.
> >> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Hi,
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> > > you'll
> >> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >> > > >>> too.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Werner
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *Anatole Tresch*
> >> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> >> > Glärnischweg 10
> >> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >> >
> >> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> >> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> >> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> >> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >> >
> >> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Anatole Tresch*
> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> > Glärnischweg 10
> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >
> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >
> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>



-- 
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon

*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter:  @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*

*Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

The point is the "bus" design is different "by framework". Standalone
-> DIY, CDI -> @Observes with an event you expect and config
management is delegated to another bean (in the idea), Spring ->
listener interface...


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-06 9:26 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>:
> I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
> CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be 100%
> similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only informed on
> config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the system). I
> also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I knew
> we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also call
> it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .
>
> WDYT?
>
> 2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
>> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to integrate
>> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the config
>> object instance.
>>
>> Wdyt?
>> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
>> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks
>> good.
>> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding an
>> > additional one.
>> >
>> > WDYT?
>> >
>> > Anatole
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
>> > >
>> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
>> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
>> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > @rmannibucau
>> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >:
>> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>> > > >
>> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> full name is really better.
>> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Hi,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> > > you'll
>> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> > > >>> too.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Werner
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > > > P +49 30 44793251
>> > > > M +49 178 7903538
>> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Anatole Tresch*
>> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> > Glärnischweg 10
>> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>> >
>> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
>> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>> >
>> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Anatole Tresch*
> Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> Glärnischweg 10
> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>
> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>
> *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

I would like to see a similar feature set in SE only as well as with
CDI/Spring. Also the listener/event functionality will probably not be 100%
similar as in CDI (I see use cases, where an instance is only informed on
config changes affecting the instance, but not the rest of the system). I
also struggled with the name of this annotation, but let it be since I knew
we will discuss on it for sure here... As an alternative we could also call
it differently, e.g. @ConfigUpdate .

WDYT?

2014-12-06 8:43 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
> interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to integrate
> it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the config
> object instance.
>
> Wdyt?
> Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
> > discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks
> good.
> > If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding an
> > additional one.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Anatole
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > annotation or annotations? :p.
> > >
> > > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> > > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
> > > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >:
> > > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> > > >
> > > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> > > >>
> > > >> full name is really better.
> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > > you'll
> > > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> > > >>> too.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Werner
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > > > P +49 30 44793251
> > > > M +49 178 7903538
> > > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > > X http://xing.to/obf
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Anatole Tresch*
> > Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> > Glärnischweg 10
> > CH - 8620 Wetzikon
> >
> > *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> > *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> > *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> > <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
> >
> > *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
> >
>



-- 
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon

*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter:  @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*

*Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

Ok. Wonder if the listener annotation makes sense btw. We can use an
interface in standalone and I am sure we ll strongly type it to integrate
it with spring cdi etc.. giving the property change event and the config
object instance.

Wdyt?
Le 6 déc. 2014 02:13, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi all
>
> I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
> discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks good.
> If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding an
> additional one.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Anatole
>
>
> 2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> > annotation or annotations? :p.
> >
> > More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> > @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
> > and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> > >
> > > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> > >>
> > >> full name is really better.
> > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > you'll
> > >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > >>>
> > >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> > >>> too.
> > >>>
> > >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> > >>>
> > >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > >>>
> > >>> Werner
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > > P +49 30 44793251
> > > M +49 178 7903538
> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > X http://xing.to/obf
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Anatole Tresch*
> Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
> Glärnischweg 10
> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>
> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
> *Twitter:  @atsticks*
> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>
> *Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Anatole Tresch <at...@gmail.com>]

Hi all

I would simply put all into a package called *mapping*, based on the
discussions we had this looks most feasible for me For met that looks good.
If we have more event related annotations, we might reconsider adding an
additional one.

WDYT?

Anatole


2014-12-05 19:44 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> annotation or annotations? :p.
>
> More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
> @WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
> and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
> >
> > Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> >>
> >> full name is really better.
> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> you'll
> >>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>>
> >>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> >>> too.
> >>>
> >>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>>
> >>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>>
> >>> Werner
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
>



-- 
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon

*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter:  @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*

*Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

annotation or annotations? :p.

More seriously: what's the issue with "mapping" for @ConfiguredX,
@WithX -  we'll surely need to rename it to something more intuitive -
and dynamic, event, listener for @ConfigChangeListener?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-05 19:26 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> +1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO
>
> Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
>>
>> full name is really better.
>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>>
>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>>> too.
>>>
>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>>
>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

+1 because it helps us to find what we need... IMHO

Am 05.12.14 15:38, schrieb Otávio Gonçalves de Santana:
> full name is really better.
> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>
>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
>> too.
>>
>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>
>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>
>> Werner
>>
>
>

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Otávio Gonçalves de Santana <ot...@gmail.com>]

full name is really better.
"org.apache.tamaya.annotation",

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>
> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> too.
>
> Anybody against that?;-)
>
> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>
> Werner
>



-- 
Otávio Gonçalves de Santana

blog:     http://otaviosantana.blogspot.com.br/
twitter: http://twitter.com/otaviojava
site:     *http://about.me/otaviojava <http://about.me/otaviojava>*
55 (11) 98255-3513

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

+1 for annotation. Feels like a standard and is usefull for 
"autocompletion" programmers... ;-)

Am 03.12.14 14:51, schrieb Werner Keil:
> Hi,
>
> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>
> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> too.
>
> Anybody against that?;-)
>
> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>
> Werner
>

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

+1

Am 04.12.14 um 14:56 schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> @andres:
> i also saw it just as an example from romain.
> the important part is to use useful package-names which are to the point
> (whatever the point is).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-04 14:51 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
>> @Anders: i agree but it doesn't mean we need to call packages
>> "something". Mapping, binding etc seems more appropriate for half of
>> them and listener/event for the other part, wdyt?
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-04 14:49 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>:
>> an
>> the
>> not
>> not
>> "API"
>> Duration
>> annotation
>> regular
>> (since
>> "exception"
>> bring
>> package
>> johndament@apache.org
>> understand

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

@andres:
i also saw it just as an example from romain.
the important part is to use useful package-names which are to the point
(whatever the point is).

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-04 14:51 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> @Anders: i agree but it doesn't mean we need to call packages
> "something". Mapping, binding etc seems more appropriate for half of
> them and listener/event for the other part, wdyt?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-04 14:49 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>:
> > @romain: +1
> > (i was going to write something similar - let's use useful package-names)
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-04 14:45 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> >> tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
> >>
> >> annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
> >> "java" on google now
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >:
> >> > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of
> an
> >> > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
> >> difficult
> >> > to browse the API documentation.
> >> >
> >> > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control
> the
> >> > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> >> >
> >> > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
> >> >
> >> > The answer will be: the annotation package
> >> >
> >> > WDYT?
> >> >
> >> > Oliver
> >> >
> >> > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >> >
> >> >> @oliver:
> >> >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
> >> technical
> >> >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> >> >>
> >> >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
> >> >> exceptions,...
> >> >>
> >> >> regards,
> >> >> gerhard
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> >>
> >> >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
> >> >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may
> not
> >> >>> want
> >> >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
> >> good
> >> >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> >> >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is
> not
> >> as
> >> >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
> >> mistakes
> >> >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> >> >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of
> "API"
> >> >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
> Duration
> >> or
> >> >>> DateTime class;-O
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Werner
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
> >> such
> >> >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
> >> "Where
> >> >>>> a
> >> >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
> annotation
> >> >>>> package."
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Oliver
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>   @romain: +1
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
> regular
> >> >>>>> part
> >> >>>>> of
> >> >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> >> >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> >> >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
> (since
> >> >>>
> >> >>> they
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> regards,
> >> >>>>> gerhard
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
> "exception"
> >> >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
> >> >>>>>> structure,
> >> >>>>>> why
> >> >>>>>> not.
> >> >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
> >> rather
> >> >>>>>> than
> >> >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
> >> >>>>>> (event,
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >> >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
> >> now.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
> >> unless
> >> >>>
> >> >>> we
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> separate
> >> >>>>>>> place.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Werner
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
> bring
> >> >>>
> >> >>> much
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
> package
> >> >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >> >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
> johndament@apache.org
> >> >:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> >> >>>
> >> >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> understand
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> >> >>>
> >> >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> you'll
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> ,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> >> >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> >> >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> > P +49 30 44793251
> >> > M +49 178 7903538
> >> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

@Anders: i agree but it doesn't mean we need to call packages
"something". Mapping, binding etc seems more appropriate for half of
them and listener/event for the other part, wdyt?


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-04 14:49 GMT+01:00 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>:
> @romain: +1
> (i was going to write something similar - let's use useful package-names)
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-04 14:45 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
>> tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
>> tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>>
>> annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
>> "java" on google now
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
>> > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of an
>> > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
>> difficult
>> > to browse the API documentation.
>> >
>> > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the
>> > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
>> >
>> > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
>> >
>> > The answer will be: the annotation package
>> >
>> > WDYT?
>> >
>> > Oliver
>> >
>> > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> >
>> >> @oliver:
>> >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
>> technical
>> >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>> >>
>> >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
>> >> exceptions,...
>> >>
>> >> regards,
>> >> gerhard
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
>> >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not
>> >>> want
>> >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
>> good
>> >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>> >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not
>> as
>> >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>> >>>
>> >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
>> mistakes
>> >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>> >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
>> >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration
>> or
>> >>> DateTime class;-O
>> >>>
>> >>> Werner
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>> >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
>> such
>> >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
>> "Where
>> >>>> a
>> >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
>> >>>> package."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Oliver
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>   @romain: +1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular
>> >>>>> part
>> >>>>> of
>> >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>> >>>>> "interfaces",...)
>> >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
>> >>>
>> >>> they
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> regards,
>> >>>>> gerhard
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
>> >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
>> >>>>>> structure,
>> >>>>>> why
>> >>>>>> not.
>> >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
>> rather
>> >>>>>> than
>> >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
>> >>>>>> (event,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
>> now.
>> >>>
>> >>> I
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
>> unless
>> >>>
>> >>> we
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> separate
>> >>>>>>> place.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Werner
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
>> >>>
>> >>> much
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>> >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org
>> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>> >>>
>> >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> >>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> binary,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>> >>>
>> >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> you'll
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> ,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >>>> P +49 30 44793251
>> >>>> M +49 178 7903538
>> >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>> >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > P +49 30 44793251
>> > M +49 178 7903538
>> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

@romain: +1
(i was going to write something similar - let's use useful package-names)

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-04 14:45 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:

> tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>
> annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
> "java" on google now
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of an
> > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
> difficult
> > to browse the API documentation.
> >
> > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the
> > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> >
> > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
> >
> > The answer will be: the annotation package
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Oliver
> >
> > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >
> >> @oliver:
> >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
> technical
> >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> >>
> >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
> >> exceptions,...
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
> >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not
> >>> want
> >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
> good
> >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not
> as
> >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> >>>
> >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
> mistakes
> >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
> >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration
> or
> >>> DateTime class;-O
> >>>
> >>> Werner
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
> such
> >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
> "Where
> >>>> a
> >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
> >>>> package."
> >>>>
> >>>> Oliver
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >>>>
> >>>>   @romain: +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular
> >>>>> part
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
> >>>
> >>> they
> >>>>>
> >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> regards,
> >>>>> gerhard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
> >>>>>> structure,
> >>>>>> why
> >>>>>> not.
> >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
> rather
> >>>>>> than
> >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
> >>>>>> (event,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
> now.
> >>>
> >>> I
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
> unless
> >>>
> >>> we
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> separate
> >>>>>>> place.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Werner
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
> >>>
> >>> much
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org
> >:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> >>>
> >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> >>>
> >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> you'll
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Just look at Log4J it features pretty much the most common backings for
configuration sources there already;-)




On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> the API will be light but the core should be as well otherwise it will
> be a blocker for adaption for much libraries
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-04 15:17 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > For the API absolutely, and more importantly modular.
> >
> > Look at Log4J a lot of it is done on an implementation level (hence it
> > could in theory implement additional projects like Tamaya if it becomes
> > suitable, maybe we should talk to the Log4J team over synergies;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> light is the key I guess
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-04 15:03 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >> > While I totally agree, annotations should be defined on an API level
> and
> >> be
> >> > independent of implementations.
> >> >
> >> > Log4J 2 is a perfect example:
> >> > http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/
> >> >
> >> > And guess what, its implementation "Log4J Core" got plenty of
> >> configuration
> >> > of its own:
> >> >
> >>
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/package-summary.html
> >> >
> >> > Maybe dreaming a bit now, but a future Log4J 2.x version could/should
> use
> >> > Tamaya there. At least if we do this right;-)
> >> >
> >> > Werner
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
> >> >> implementation-details.
> >> >>
> >> >> While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP
> EC
> >> >> found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes
> back
> >> "in
> >> >> pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java
> >> EE;-D)
> >> >> isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is
> >> crucial
> >> >> (also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the
> community
> >> >> wanted that)
> >> >>
> >> >> Werner
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the
> >> lowest
> >> >>> common denominator.
> >> >>> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
> >> >>> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for
> SE's
> >> >>> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >>> Andres
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -------------------------------------------
> >> >>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> >>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >> >>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary,
> >> >>> and
> >> >>> those who don't.
> >> >>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> >> >>> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching
> >> for
> >> >>> > "java" on google now
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>> > @rmannibucau
> >> >>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >>> >:
> >> >>> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the
> usability
> >> of
> >> >>> an
> >> >>> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is
> even
> >> >>> > difficult
> >> >>> > > to browse the API documentation.
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I
> control
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config
> >> annotation
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > WDYT?
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > Oliver
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > >> @oliver:
> >> >>> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to
> a
> >> >>> > technical
> >> >>> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces,
> >> enums,
> >> >>> > >> exceptions,...
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> regards,
> >> >>> > >> gerhard
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >:
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where
> they
> >> put
> >> >>> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We
> >> may
> >> >>> not
> >> >>> > >>> want
> >> >>> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike
> >> is a
> >> >>> > good
> >> >>> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or
> aim of
> >> >>> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the
> day is
> >> >>> not
> >> >>> > as
> >> >>> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid
> grave
> >> >>> > mistakes
> >> >>> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty
> of
> >> >>> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort
> of
> >> >>> "API"
> >> >>> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
> >> >>> Duration
> >> >>> > or
> >> >>> > >>> DateTime class;-O
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> Werner
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> >> >>> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> >> >>> > >>> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But
> programmers
> >> use
> >> >>> > such
> >> >>> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their
> question is
> >> >>> > "Where
> >> >>> > >>>> a
> >> >>> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
> >> >>> annotation
> >> >>> > >>>> package."
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >>>> Oliver
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>   @romain: +1
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
> >> >>> regular
> >> >>> > >>>>> part
> >> >>> > >>>>> of
> >> >>> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like
> "classes",
> >> >>> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> >> >>> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java
> 5
> >> >>> (since
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> they
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>> regards,
> >> >>> > >>>>> gerhard
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> >>> > >>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
> >> >>> "exception"
> >> >>> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or
> semantic
> >> >>> > >>>>>> structure,
> >> >>> > >>>>>> why
> >> >>> > >>>>>> not.
> >> >>> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the
> Wiki
> >> >>> > rather
> >> >>> > >>>>>> than
> >> >>> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >> >>> > >>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >>> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> >>> > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as
> >> well
> >> >>> > >>>>>> (event,
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> >> werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package
> >> right
> >> >>> > now.
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> I
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many
> >> things,
> >> >>> > unless
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> we
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give
> >> them a
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> separate
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> place.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> Werner
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation
> doesn't
> >> >>> bring
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> much
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
> >> >>> package
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
> >> >>> johndament@apache.org
> >> >>> > >:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
> >> administrator.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> >> >>> understand
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>> and
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
> >> recursion.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> >> >>> > >>>
> >> >>> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>> you'll
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> > >>>> --
> >> >>> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >>> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >>> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> >> >>> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> >> >>> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >>> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >>> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >>> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >>>>
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > --
> >> >>> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >> >>> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >> >>> > > P +49 30 44793251
> >> >>> > > M +49 178 7903538
> >> >>> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >> >>> > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >> >>> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >> >>> > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

the API will be light but the core should be as well otherwise it will
be a blocker for adaption for much libraries


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-04 15:17 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> For the API absolutely, and more importantly modular.
>
> Look at Log4J a lot of it is done on an implementation level (hence it
> could in theory implement additional projects like Tamaya if it becomes
> suitable, maybe we should talk to the Log4J team over synergies;-)
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> light is the key I guess
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-04 15:03 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > While I totally agree, annotations should be defined on an API level and
>> be
>> > independent of implementations.
>> >
>> > Log4J 2 is a perfect example:
>> > http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/
>> >
>> > And guess what, its implementation "Log4J Core" got plenty of
>> configuration
>> > of its own:
>> >
>> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/package-summary.html
>> >
>> > Maybe dreaming a bit now, but a future Log4J 2.x version could/should use
>> > Tamaya there. At least if we do this right;-)
>> >
>> > Werner
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
>> >> implementation-details.
>> >>
>> >> While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP EC
>> >> found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes back
>> "in
>> >> pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java
>> EE;-D)
>> >> isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is
>> crucial
>> >> (also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the community
>> >> wanted that)
>> >>
>> >> Werner
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the
>> lowest
>> >>> common denominator.
>> >>> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
>> >>>
>> >>> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
>> >>> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
>> >>> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> Andres
>> >>>
>> >>> -------------------------------------------
>> >>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> >>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> >>> --
>> >>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> >>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>> >>> and
>> >>> those who don't.
>> >>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
>> >>> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching
>> for
>> >>> > "java" on google now
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> > @rmannibucau
>> >>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>> >:
>> >>> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability
>> of
>> >>> an
>> >>> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
>> >>> > difficult
>> >>> > > to browse the API documentation.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control
>> >>> the
>> >>> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config
>> annotation
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > WDYT?
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Oliver
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >> @oliver:
>> >>> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
>> >>> > technical
>> >>> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces,
>> enums,
>> >>> > >> exceptions,...
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> regards,
>> >>> > >> gerhard
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they
>> put
>> >>> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We
>> may
>> >>> not
>> >>> > >>> want
>> >>> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike
>> is a
>> >>> > good
>> >>> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>> >>> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is
>> >>> not
>> >>> > as
>> >>> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
>> >>> > mistakes
>> >>> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>> >>> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of
>> >>> "API"
>> >>> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
>> >>> Duration
>> >>> > or
>> >>> > >>> DateTime class;-O
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> Werner
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>> >>> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>> >>> > >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers
>> use
>> >>> > such
>> >>> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
>> >>> > "Where
>> >>> > >>>> a
>> >>> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
>> >>> annotation
>> >>> > >>>> package."
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >>>> Oliver
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >>>>   @romain: +1
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
>> >>> regular
>> >>> > >>>>> part
>> >>> > >>>>> of
>> >>> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>> >>> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
>> >>> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
>> >>> (since
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> they
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>> regards,
>> >>> > >>>>> gerhard
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >:
>> >>> > >>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>> >>> > >>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
>> >>> "exception"
>> >>> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
>> >>> > >>>>>> structure,
>> >>> > >>>>>> why
>> >>> > >>>>>> not.
>> >>> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
>> >>> > rather
>> >>> > >>>>>> than
>> >>> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>> >>> > >>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as
>> well
>> >>> > >>>>>> (event,
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
>> werner.keil@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package
>> right
>> >>> > now.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> I
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many
>> things,
>> >>> > unless
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> we
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give
>> them a
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> separate
>> >>> > >>>>>>> place.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> Werner
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
>> >>> bring
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> much
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
>> >>> package
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
>> >>> johndament@apache.org
>> >>> > >:
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
>> administrator.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
>> >>> understand
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>> and
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
>> recursion.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >>> > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>> you'll
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > >>>> --
>> >>> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >>> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >>> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
>> >>> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
>> >>> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>> >>> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >>> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >>>>
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > --
>> >>> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> >>> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> >>> > > P +49 30 44793251
>> >>> > > M +49 178 7903538
>> >>> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >>> > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> >>> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> >>> > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

For the API absolutely, and more importantly modular.

Look at Log4J a lot of it is done on an implementation level (hence it
could in theory implement additional projects like Tamaya if it becomes
suitable, maybe we should talk to the Log4J team over synergies;-)




On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> light is the key I guess
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-04 15:03 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > While I totally agree, annotations should be defined on an API level and
> be
> > independent of implementations.
> >
> > Log4J 2 is a perfect example:
> > http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/
> >
> > And guess what, its implementation "Log4J Core" got plenty of
> configuration
> > of its own:
> >
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/package-summary.html
> >
> > Maybe dreaming a bit now, but a future Log4J 2.x version could/should use
> > Tamaya there. At least if we do this right;-)
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
> >> implementation-details.
> >>
> >> While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP EC
> >> found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes back
> "in
> >> pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java
> EE;-D)
> >> isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is
> crucial
> >> (also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the community
> >> wanted that)
> >>
> >> Werner
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the
> lowest
> >>> common denominator.
> >>> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
> >>>
> >>> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
> >>> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
> >>> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Andres
> >>>
> >>> -------------------------------------------
> >>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>> --
> >>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
> >>> and
> >>> those who don't.
> >>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >>> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> >>> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
> >>> >
> >>> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching
> for
> >>> > "java" on google now
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> > @rmannibucau
> >>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <
> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>> >:
> >>> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability
> of
> >>> an
> >>> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
> >>> > difficult
> >>> > > to browse the API documentation.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control
> >>> the
> >>> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config
> annotation
> >>> > >
> >>> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
> >>> > >
> >>> > > WDYT?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Oliver
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >>> > >
> >>> > >> @oliver:
> >>> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
> >>> > technical
> >>> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces,
> enums,
> >>> > >> exceptions,...
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> regards,
> >>> > >> gerhard
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they
> put
> >>> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We
> may
> >>> not
> >>> > >>> want
> >>> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike
> is a
> >>> > good
> >>> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> >>> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is
> >>> not
> >>> > as
> >>> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
> >>> > mistakes
> >>> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> >>> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of
> >>> "API"
> >>> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
> >>> Duration
> >>> > or
> >>> > >>> DateTime class;-O
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> Werner
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> >>> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> >>> > >>> wrote:
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers
> use
> >>> > such
> >>> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
> >>> > "Where
> >>> > >>>> a
> >>> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
> >>> annotation
> >>> > >>>> package."
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>> Oliver
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>>   @romain: +1
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
> >>> regular
> >>> > >>>>> part
> >>> > >>>>> of
> >>> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> >>> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> >>> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
> >>> (since
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> they
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> regards,
> >>> > >>>>> gerhard
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >:
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >>> > >>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
> >>> "exception"
> >>> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
> >>> > >>>>>> structure,
> >>> > >>>>>> why
> >>> > >>>>>> not.
> >>> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
> >>> > rather
> >>> > >>>>>> than
> >>> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >>> > >>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> > >>>>>> wrote:
> >>> > >>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as
> well
> >>> > >>>>>> (event,
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com>:
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package
> right
> >>> > now.
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> I
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many
> things,
> >>> > unless
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> we
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give
> them a
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> separate
> >>> > >>>>>>> place.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> Werner
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
> >>> bring
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> much
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
> >>> package
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
> >>> johndament@apache.org
> >>> > >:
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system
> administrator.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> >>> understand
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> >>> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>> and
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand
> recursion.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >>> > >>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>> you'll
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> > >>>> --
> >>> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >>> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> >>> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> >>> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> >>> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >
> >>> > > --
> >>> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >>> > > P +49 30 44793251
> >>> > > M +49 178 7903538
> >>> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>> > > S oliver.b.fischer
> >>> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>> > > X http://xing.to/obf
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

light is the key I guess


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-04 15:03 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> While I totally agree, annotations should be defined on an API level and be
> independent of implementations.
>
> Log4J 2 is a perfect example:
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/
>
> And guess what, its implementation "Log4J Core" got plenty of configuration
> of its own:
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/package-summary.html
>
> Maybe dreaming a bit now, but a future Log4J 2.x version could/should use
> Tamaya there. At least if we do this right;-)
>
> Werner
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
>> implementation-details.
>>
>> While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP EC
>> found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes back "in
>> pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java EE;-D)
>> isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is crucial
>> (also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the community
>> wanted that)
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the lowest
>>> common denominator.
>>> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
>>>
>>> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
>>> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
>>> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andres
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>> --
>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>>> and
>>> those who don't.
>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
>>> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>>> >
>>> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
>>> > "java" on google now
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > @rmannibucau
>>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> >:
>>> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of
>>> an
>>> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
>>> > difficult
>>> > > to browse the API documentation.
>>> > >
>>> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control
>>> the
>>> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
>>> > >
>>> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
>>> > >
>>> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
>>> > >
>>> > > WDYT?
>>> > >
>>> > > Oliver
>>> > >
>>> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>>> > >
>>> > >> @oliver:
>>> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
>>> > technical
>>> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>>> > >>
>>> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
>>> > >> exceptions,...
>>> > >>
>>> > >> regards,
>>> > >> gerhard
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
>>> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may
>>> not
>>> > >>> want
>>> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
>>> > good
>>> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>>> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is
>>> not
>>> > as
>>> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
>>> > mistakes
>>> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>>> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of
>>> "API"
>>> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
>>> Duration
>>> > or
>>> > >>> DateTime class;-O
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Werner
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>>> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>>> > >>> wrote:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
>>> > such
>>> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
>>> > "Where
>>> > >>>> a
>>> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
>>> annotation
>>> > >>>> package."
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Oliver
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>   @romain: +1
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
>>> regular
>>> > >>>>> part
>>> > >>>>> of
>>> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>>> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
>>> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
>>> (since
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> they
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> regards,
>>> > >>>>> gerhard
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
>>> "exception"
>>> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
>>> > >>>>>> structure,
>>> > >>>>>> why
>>> > >>>>>> not.
>>> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
>>> > rather
>>> > >>>>>> than
>>> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
>>> > >>>>>> (event,
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
>>> > now.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> I
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
>>> > unless
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> we
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> separate
>>> > >>>>>>> place.
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> Werner
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
>>> bring
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> much
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
>>> package
>>> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
>>> johndament@apache.org
>>> > >:
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
>>> understand
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
>>> > >>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>> and
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>>> > >>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>> you'll
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > >>>> --
>>> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
>>> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
>>> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>>> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> > > P +49 30 44793251
>>> > > M +49 178 7903538
>>> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> > > S oliver.b.fischer
>>> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>> > > X http://xing.to/obf
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

While I totally agree, annotations should be defined on an API level and be
independent of implementations.

Log4J 2 is a perfect example:
http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/

And guess what, its implementation "Log4J Core" got plenty of configuration
of its own:
http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/config/package-summary.html

Maybe dreaming a bit now, but a future Log4J 2.x version could/should use
Tamaya there. At least if we do this right;-)

Werner

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
> implementation-details.
>
> While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP EC
> found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes back "in
> pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java EE;-D)
> isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is crucial
> (also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the community
> wanted that)
>
> Werner
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the lowest
>> common denominator.
>> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
>>
>> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
>> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
>> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andres
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> --
>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>> and
>> those who don't.
>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
>> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>> >
>> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
>> > "java" on google now
>> >
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> >:
>> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of
>> an
>> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
>> > difficult
>> > > to browse the API documentation.
>> > >
>> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control
>> the
>> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
>> > >
>> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
>> > >
>> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
>> > >
>> > > WDYT?
>> > >
>> > > Oliver
>> > >
>> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> > >
>> > >> @oliver:
>> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
>> > technical
>> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>> > >>
>> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
>> > >> exceptions,...
>> > >>
>> > >> regards,
>> > >> gerhard
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > >>
>> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
>> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may
>> not
>> > >>> want
>> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
>> > good
>> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is
>> not
>> > as
>> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
>> > mistakes
>> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of
>> "API"
>> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
>> Duration
>> > or
>> > >>> DateTime class;-O
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Werner
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
>> > such
>> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
>> > "Where
>> > >>>> a
>> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
>> annotation
>> > >>>> package."
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Oliver
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>   @romain: +1
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a
>> regular
>> > >>>>> part
>> > >>>>> of
>> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
>> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
>> (since
>> > >>>
>> > >>> they
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> regards,
>> > >>>>> gerhard
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
>> "exception"
>> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
>> > >>>>>> structure,
>> > >>>>>> why
>> > >>>>>> not.
>> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
>> > rather
>> > >>>>>> than
>> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
>> > >>>>>> (event,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
>> > now.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
>> > unless
>> > >>>
>> > >>> we
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> separate
>> > >>>>>>> place.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Werner
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
>> bring
>> > >>>
>> > >>> much
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a
>> package
>> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
>> johndament@apache.org
>> > >:
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>> > >>>
>> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
>> understand
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>> > >>>
>> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> you'll
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>> --
>> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
>> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
>> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
>> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>> > > P +49 30 44793251
>> > > M +49 178 7903538
>> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>> > > S oliver.b.fischer
>> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>> > > X http://xing.to/obf
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Similar to Agorava, those (CDI, POJO, Spring, Guice,...) look like
implementation-details.

While Tamaya (similar to Agorava which went the same path after JCP EC
found a JSR wasn't suitable at the time, ironically Agorava comes back "in
pieces" especially a large chunk through JSR 375, Security for Java EE;-D)
isn't a JSR a clear separation between API and implementations is crucial
(also to some future factoring out of parts into a JSR if the community
wanted that)

Werner

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the lowest
> common denominator.
> cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.
>
> Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
> environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
> requirements first and then plug-in EE's.
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> --
> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
> those who don't.
> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> > tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
> >
> > annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
> > "java" on google now
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of
> an
> > > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
> > difficult
> > > to browse the API documentation.
> > >
> > > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the
> > > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> > >
> > > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
> > >
> > > The answer will be: the annotation package
> > >
> > > WDYT?
> > >
> > > Oliver
> > >
> > > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> > >
> > >> @oliver:
> > >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
> > technical
> > >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> > >>
> > >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
> > >> exceptions,...
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> gerhard
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >>
> > >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
> > >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may
> not
> > >>> want
> > >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
> > good
> > >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> > >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not
> > as
> > >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> > >>>
> > >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
> > mistakes
> > >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> > >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
> > >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a
> Duration
> > or
> > >>> DateTime class;-O
> > >>>
> > >>> Werner
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> > >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
> > such
> > >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
> > "Where
> > >>>> a
> > >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the
> annotation
> > >>>> package."
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Oliver
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>   @romain: +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular
> > >>>>> part
> > >>>>> of
> > >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> > >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> > >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5
> (since
> > >>>
> > >>> they
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> regards,
> > >>>>> gerhard
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or
> "exception"
> > >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
> > >>>>>> structure,
> > >>>>>> why
> > >>>>>> not.
> > >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
> > rather
> > >>>>>> than
> > >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
> > >>>>>> (event,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> > >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
> > now.
> > >>>
> > >>> I
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
> > unless
> > >>>
> > >>> we
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> separate
> > >>>>>>> place.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Werner
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't
> bring
> > >>>
> > >>> much
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> > >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <
> johndament@apache.org
> > >:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> > >>>
> > >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who
> understand
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> > >>>
> > >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> you'll
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> ,
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> > >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> > >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> > >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> > >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >
> > > --
> > > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > > P +49 30 44793251
> > > M +49 178 7903538
> > > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > > S oliver.b.fischer
> > > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > > X http://xing.to/obf
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>]

annotation package should work on all environments, iow, it's the lowest
common denominator.
cdi packages is, well, you guessed, only related to CDI.

Given that Tamaya's API is supposed to be used between SE and EE
environments our driving design goal *should be* IMHO to cater for SE's
requirements first and then plug-in EE's.

Cheers,
Andres

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://jroller.com/aalmiray
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
> tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?
>
> annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
> "java" on google now
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> > @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of an
> > API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even
> difficult
> > to browse the API documentation.
> >
> > And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the
> > injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
> >
> > And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
> >
> > The answer will be: the annotation package
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Oliver
> >
> > Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >
> >> @oliver:
> >> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a
> technical
> >> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
> >>
> >> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
> >> exceptions,...
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
> >>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not
> >>> want
> >>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a
> good
> >>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> >>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not
> as
> >>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
> >>>
> >>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave
> mistakes
> >>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> >>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
> >>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration
> or
> >>> DateTime class;-O
> >>>
> >>> Werner
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> >>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use
> such
> >>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is
> "Where
> >>>> a
> >>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
> >>>> package."
> >>>>
> >>>> Oliver
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >>>>
> >>>>   @romain: +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular
> >>>>> part
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> >>>>> "interfaces",...)
> >>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
> >>>
> >>> they
> >>>>>
> >>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> regards,
> >>>>> gerhard
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> >>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
> >>>>>> structure,
> >>>>>> why
> >>>>>> not.
> >>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki
> rather
> >>>>>> than
> >>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
> >>>>>> (event,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right
> now.
> >>>
> >>> I
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things,
> unless
> >>>
> >>> we
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> separate
> >>>>>>> place.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Werner
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
> >>>
> >>> much
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> >>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org
> >:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> >>>
> >>> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> binary,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> >>>
> >>> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> you'll
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> too.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
> >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> >>>> P +49 30 44793251
> >>>> M +49 178 7903538
> >>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> >>>> S oliver.b.fischer
> >>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> >>>> X http://xing.to/obf
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

tamaya config cdi -> cdi package?
tamaya pojo binding -> binding package?

annotation is way too generic to help anyone, it is like searching for
"java" on google now


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-03 21:57 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> @gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of an
> API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even difficult
> to browse the API documentation.
>
> And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the
> injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?
>
> And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation
>
> The answer will be: the annotation package
>
> WDYT?
>
> Oliver
>
> Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>
>> @oliver:
>> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a technical
>> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>>
>> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
>> exceptions,...
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
>>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not
>>> want
>>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a good
>>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not as
>>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>>>
>>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave mistakes
>>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
>>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration or
>>> DateTime class;-O
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such
>>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where
>>>> a
>>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
>>>> package."
>>>>
>>>> Oliver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>>>>
>>>>   @romain: +1
>>>>>
>>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular
>>>>> part
>>>>> of
>>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>>>>> "interfaces",...)
>>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
>>>
>>> they
>>>>>
>>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
>>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic
>>>>>> structure,
>>>>>> why
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well
>>>>>> (event,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now.
>>>
>>> I
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless
>>>
>>> we
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> separate
>>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
>>>
>>> much
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>>>
>>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> binary,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>>>
>>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>>> P +49 30 44793251
>>>> M +49 178 7903538
>>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

@gerhard This is true but we should also think about the usability of an 
API. Packages with too many elements are always a pain. It is even 
difficult to browse the API documentation.

And please keep in mind the question of the user: How can I control the 
injection of configuration values? There do I have to look?

And what is the search entered into Google: Tamaya config annotation

The answer will be: the annotation package

WDYT?

Oliver

Am 03.12.14 17:13, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> @oliver:
> the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a technical
> concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .
>
> you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
> exceptions,...
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
>> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
>> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not want
>> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a good
>> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
>> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not as
>> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>>
>> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave mistakes
>> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
>> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
>> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration or
>> DateTime class;-O
>>
>> Werner
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
>> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such
>>> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where a
>>> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
>>> package."
>>>
>>> Oliver
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>>>
>>>   @romain: +1
>>>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part
>>>> of
>>>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>>>> "interfaces",...)
>>>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
>> they
>>>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> gerhard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>   See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>>>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
>>>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure,
>>>>> why
>>>>> not.
>>>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
>>>>> than
>>>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
>>>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now.
>> I
>>>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless
>> we
>>>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> separate
>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
>> much
>>>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>>>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
>> aalmiray@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> binary,
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> those who don't.
>>>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
>> werner.keil@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>>>>>> you'll
>>>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> P +49 30 44793251
>>> M +49 178 7903538
>>> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>>> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>>>
>>>

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

@oliver:
the point here is that it's a package which is only related to a technical
concept of the language and not a "domain" concept/area/... .

you can ask the same question you mentioned about interfaces, enums,
exceptions,...

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-03 16:32 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:

> There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
> annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not want
> to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a good
> thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
> particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not as
> important as designing it as modular as we can.
>
> And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave mistakes
> of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
> dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
> interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration or
> DateTime class;-O
>
> Werner
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <
> o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net>
> wrote:
>
> > @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such
> > package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where a
> > the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
> > package."
> >
> > Oliver
> >
> >
> > Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> >
> >  @romain: +1
> >> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part
> >> of
> >> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> >> "interfaces",...)
> >> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since
> they
> >> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>  See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >>>
> >>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> >>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure,
> >>> why
> >>> not.
> >>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
> >>> than
> >>> passing around names and structures;-)
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> >>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now.
> I
> >>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless
> we
> >>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> >>>>>
> >>>> separate
> >>>
> >>>> place.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Werner
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >>>>>
> >>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
> much
> >>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> >>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>>>>> @rmannibucau
> >>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> aalmiray@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> binary,
> >>>>
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> those who don't.
> >>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >>>
> >>>> you'll
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> too.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Werner
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> > --
> > N Oliver B. Fischer
> > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> > P +49 30 44793251
> > M +49 178 7903538
> > E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> > S oliver.b.fischer
> > J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> > X http://xing.to/obf
> >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

There are even a few cases like Java Batch JSR (353) where they put
annotations into a completely separate (OSGi/Maven) bundle. We may not want
to go that far, but modularity as you also see with DeltaSpike is a good
thing. Whether you do this "horizontally" via a purpose or aim of
particular types or call it "annotation" at the end of the day is not as
important as designing it as modular as we can.

And (despite it's Stephen's birthday today;-) try to avoid grave mistakes
of especially JSR 310 where top level core types have plenty of
dependencies to various sub-packages and far worse, the sort of "API"
interfaces themselves depend on implementation details like a Duration or
DateTime class;-O

Werner

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>
wrote:

> @gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such
> package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where a
> the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation
> package."
>
> Oliver
>
>
> Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
>
>  @romain: +1
>> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part
>> of
>> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
>> "interfaces",...)
>> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since they
>> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>  See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>>>
>>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
>>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure,
>>> why
>>> not.
>>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
>>> than
>>> passing around names and structures;-)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
>>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
>>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
>>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>>>>>
>>>> separate
>>>
>>>> place.
>>>>>
>>>>> Werner
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>>
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
>>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> binary,
>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> those who don't.
>>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>>>
>>>> you'll
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net>]

@gerhard: From the language view you are right. But programmers use such 
package names for navigation in IDEs and code. Their question is "Where 
a the annotations I can use?" The answer is "They are in the annotation 
package."

Oliver


Am 03.12.14 15:50, schrieb Gerhard Petracek:
> @romain: +1
> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part of
> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> "interfaces",...)
> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since they
> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
>> See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>>
>> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
>> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, why
>> not.
>> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather than
>> passing around names and structures;-)
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
>>> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>>>
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>>>> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
>>>> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
>>>> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
>> separate
>>>> place.
>>>>
>>>> Werner
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
>>>>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>>>>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>> @rmannibucau
>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
>>>>>> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> +1 on "annotation"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>>>>>>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>>>>>>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
>>> binary,
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> those who don't.
>>>>>>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking not only at Java EE (
>> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>>>>>>> you'll
>>>>>>>> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>>>>>>>> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>>>>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>>>>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anybody against that?;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Werner
>>>>>>>>

-- 
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf

RE: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Tresch, Anatole " <an...@credit-suisse.com>]

For me it is OK to drop. I would definitively discourage putting exception into a separate package. Often you have only a few ones (in Tamaya it is AFAIK currently one).Additionally you create unnecessary package dependencies etc and you did probably not think enough to where the exception should belong (has maximal cohesion or similar)...

-----Original Message-----
From: Werner Keil [mailto:werner.keil@gmail.com] 
Sent: Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2014 15:59
To: dev@tamaya.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

Many Java standards do, but underlying CDI is an example where it was also
done differently.
Agorava another popular downstream user of CDI (and DeltaSpike to some
extent) has a dedicated "exceptions" package, but also does not handle
annotations separately.

Werner

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> wrote:

> @romain: +1
> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part of
> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> "interfaces",...)
> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since they
> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
> > See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >
> > A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> > packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure,
> why
> > not.
> > Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
> than
> > passing around names and structures;-)
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> > > configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now.
> I
> > > > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless
> we
> > > > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> > separate
> > > > place.
> > > >
> > > > Werner
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
> much
> > > >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> > > >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> @rmannibucau
> > > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> > > >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> aalmiray@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> -------------------------------------------
> > > >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > > >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > > >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > > >> >> --
> > > >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > > >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> > > binary,
> > > >> and
> > > >> >> those who don't.
> > > >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> > Hi,
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (
> > http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > > >> >> you'll
> > > >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > > >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > > >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> > > >> >> ,
> > > >> >> > too.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Werner
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Many Java standards do, but underlying CDI is an example where it was also
done differently.
Agorava another popular downstream user of CDI (and DeltaSpike to some
extent) has a dedicated "exceptions" package, but also does not handle
annotations separately.

Werner

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> wrote:

> @romain: +1
> we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part of
> the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
> "interfaces",...)
> using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since they
> were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
>
> > See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
> >
> > A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> > packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure,
> why
> > not.
> > Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather
> than
> > passing around names and structures;-)
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> > > configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now.
> I
> > > > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless
> we
> > > > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> > separate
> > > > place.
> > > >
> > > > Werner
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring
> much
> > > >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> > > >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> @rmannibucau
> > > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> > > >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <
> aalmiray@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> -------------------------------------------
> > > >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > > >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > > >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > > >> >> --
> > > >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > > >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> > > binary,
> > > >> and
> > > >> >> those who don't.
> > > >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <
> werner.keil@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> > Hi,
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (
> > http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > > >> >> you'll
> > > >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > > >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > > >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> > > >> >> ,
> > > >> >> > too.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Werner
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>]

@romain: +1
we also dropped it in deltaspike, because annotations are a regular part of
the language (you also >don't< create packages like "classes",
"interfaces",...)
using an own package for annotations was "modern" with java 5 (since they
were provided as "secondary" part in the beginning).

regards,
gerhard



2014-12-03 15:25 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:

> See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>
> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, why
> not.
> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather than
> passing around names and structures;-)
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> > configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
> > > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
> > > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> separate
> > > place.
> > >
> > > Werner
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
> > >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> > >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau
> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> > >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> > >> >>
> > >> >> -------------------------------------------
> > >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> > binary,
> > >> and
> > >> >> those who don't.
> > >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > Hi,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (
> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > >> >> you'll
> > >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> > >> >> ,
> > >> >> > too.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Werner
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Autocomplete in IDEs is probably the most striking argument for calling it
"annotation", the IDE will do the rest;-)

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Tresch, Anatole <
anatole.tresch@credit-suisse.com> wrote:

> Renaming annot to annotation I am indifferent. If many others use the long
> name that's OK for me.
>
> Most of the annotations in the package are for controlling the aspects of
> config injection. So spreading them makes not much sense. Also an advantage
> is that developers
> also can start typing tamaya.annot and then see all the annotations
> available in a context, which I thaught, would be handy.
>
> Reducing them only 3 makes them probably less comfortable, but I am open
> for discussion on annotation design here. I would say, once I did a post
> describing the annotations around there, we might be ready to restart
> discussions on them ;)
>
> WDYT?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Werner Keil [mailto:werner.keil@gmail.com]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2014 15:25
> To: dev@tamaya.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"
>
> See DeviceMap that's an option, too.
>
> A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
> packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, why
> not.
> Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather than
> passing around names and structures;-)
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> > configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
> > > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
> > > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a
> separate
> > > place.
> > >
> > > Werner
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
> > >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> > >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> @rmannibucau
> > >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> > >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> > >> >>
> > >> >> -------------------------------------------
> > >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> > >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> > >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> > >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> > binary,
> > >> and
> > >> >> those who don't.
> > >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > Hi,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (
> http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> > >> >> you'll
> > >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> > >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> > >> >> ,
> > >> >> > too.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Werner
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>

RE: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["Tresch, Anatole " <an...@credit-suisse.com>]

Renaming annot to annotation I am indifferent. If many others use the long name that's OK for me.

Most of the annotations in the package are for controlling the aspects of config injection. So spreading them makes not much sense. Also an advantage is that developers
also can start typing tamaya.annot and then see all the annotations available in a context, which I thaught, would be handy.

Reducing them only 3 makes them probably less comfortable, but I am open for discussion on annotation design here. I would say, once I did a post describing the annotations around there, we might be ready to restart discussions on them ;)

WDYT?


-----Original Message-----
From: Werner Keil [mailto:werner.keil@gmail.com] 
Sent: Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2014 15:25
To: dev@tamaya.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

See DeviceMap that's an option, too.

A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, why
not.
Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather than
passing around names and structures;-)

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
> > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
> > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a separate
> > place.
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
> >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> >> >>
> >> >> -------------------------------------------
> >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> >> --
> >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary,
> >> and
> >> >> those who don't.
> >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> you'll
> >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >> >> ,
> >> >> > too.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Werner
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

See DeviceMap that's an option, too.

A whole lot of JSRs do provide dedicated "annotation" or "exception"
packages, but if we grouped it into some logical or semantic structure, why
not.
Probably best to sketch anything in that direction on the Wiki rather than
passing around names and structures;-)

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
> configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> > Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
> > would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
> > reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a separate
> > place.
> >
> > Werner
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
> >> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> >> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> >> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +1 on "annotation"
> >> >>
> >> >> -------------------------------------------
> >> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> >> --
> >> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary,
> >> and
> >> >> those who don't.
> >> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> >> you'll
> >> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> >> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >> >> ,
> >> >> > too.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Werner
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

we don't need to clutter anything, we need to split it as well (event,
configuration, listener, ...we have several topics)


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-03 15:13 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>:
> Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
> would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
> reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a separate
> place.
>
> Werner
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
>> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
>> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
>> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>> >
>> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 on "annotation"
>> >>
>> >> -------------------------------------------
>> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> >> --
>> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
>> and
>> >> those who don't.
>> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> >> you'll
>> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >> >
>> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
>> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>> >> ,
>> >> > too.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
>> >> >
>> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >> >
>> >> > Werner
>> >> >
>> >>
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Well, there are 10 annotations now in the "annot" package right now. I
would not want to clutter the top level with too many things, unless we
reduce the annotations to 2 or 3 it seems better to give them a separate
place.

Werner

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
> information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
> classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> > +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
> >
> > On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on "annotation"
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------
> >> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> >> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> >> --
> >> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> >> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary,
> and
> >> those who don't.
> >> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> >> you'll
> >> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> >> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >> >
> >> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> >> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called
> "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> >> ,
> >> > too.
> >> >
> >> > Anybody against that?;-)
> >> >
> >> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >> >
> >> > Werner
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

if we can just not use it it is better. annotation doesn't bring much
information IMHO. Otherwise to stay consistent we put a package
classes, another one interfaces, an enumerations etc...


Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau
http://www.tomitribe.com
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-12-03 15:02 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>:
> +1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.
>
> On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on "annotation"
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
>> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
>> --
>> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
>> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
>> those who don't.
>> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
>> you'll
>> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
>> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>> >
>> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
>> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
>> ,
>> > too.
>> >
>> > Anybody against that?;-)
>> >
>> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>> >
>> > Werner
>> >
>>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

["John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>]

+1 for full names wherever possible and the norm.

On Wed Dec 03 2014 at 8:54:58 AM Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 on "annotation"
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
> http://jroller.com/aalmiray
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
> --
> What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
> There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
> those who don't.
> To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/)
> you'll
> > find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> > "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
> >
> > I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> > "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation"
> ,
> > too.
> >
> > Anybody against that?;-)
> >
> > I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
> >
> > Werner
> >
>

Re: "annotation" instead of "annot"

[Andres Almiray <aa...@gmail.com>]

+1 on "annotation"

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://jroller.com/aalmiray
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and
those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Looking not only at Java EE (http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/7/api/) you'll
> find plenty of packages from "javax.annotation" to
> "javax.servlet.annotation", etc.
>
> I already raised this to Anatole before Tamaya, that
> "org.apache.tamaya.annot" should be called "org.apache.tamaya.annotation",
> too.
>
> Anybody against that?;-)
>
> I could also create a JIRA ticket for that.
>
> Werner
>