You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@deltaspike.apache.org by Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> on 2013/11/15 11:10:14 UTC
Re: Data Module
Finally found some spare time to get back to this. You can find an API
proposal at [1] and a sample repository at [2].
Suggestions?
[1]
https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/tree/master/deltaspike/modules/data/api/src/main/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/api/mapping
[2]
https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/blob/master/deltaspike/modules/data/impl/src/test/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/test/service/SimpleMappedRepository.java
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on the feature, just been busy on a project where that would have been
> handy.
>
> And apologies for letting the thread quiet, will I'll try to propose
> something over the next two weeks based on the initial API suggestion (and
> get some other JIRA issues finally done...).
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Yep, I still think it's useful.
>>
>> JLouis
>>
>>
>> 2013/10/1 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>>
>> > Not particularly
>> >
>> > the thread ends while the feature is useful IMO so simply asking what
>> to do
>> > next ;)
>> >
>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2013/10/1 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> > > Was this my action item?
>> > >
>> > > Sent from my iPhone
>> > >
>> > > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 7:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi
>> > > >
>> > > > any news on it?
>> > > >
>> > > > @ResultMapper was good to me
>> > > >
>> > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> > > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 2013/7/12 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>> > > >
>> > > >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Ps: you can make a cdi bean an ejb from cdi extension
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> No, the bootstrapping for each container do not communicate to my
>> > > >> knowledge.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Le 12 juil. 2013 08:12, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > a
>> > > >>> écrit :
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>> Hi
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> Depending the case DTO are not an option.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> I agree in rest app i wouldnt it but if not possible (maybe
>> through
>> > > >>>> another Bean) it would kill this module for half of the usages i
>> see
>> > > >>> since
>> > > >>>> i'd need to add this layer.
>> > > >>>> Le 12 juil. 2013 06:55, "hantsy" <ha...@yahoo.com.cn> a écrit :
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>> No DTO please, data module for data access, why we care about
>> DTO.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> A question about the data, the difference for EJB and none EJB
>> > > >>>>> environment.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> if possible in a EJB envoriment, proxy the Repository and add
>> > > >> @Stateless
>> > > >>>>> and transaction declaration to Repository automatically at
>> runtime.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Regards
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Hantsy
>> > > >>>>>> On 7/10/2013 23:23, Thomas Hug wrote:
>> > > >>>>>> I wouldn't label the feature with DTO but rather as some
>> general
>> > > >>> result
>> > > >>>>>> transformation - might also be useful for e.g. native queries.
>> > Going
>> > > >>>>> back
>> > > >>>>>> to the API suggestion, from that perspective such an annotation
>> > > >> should
>> > > >>>>>> probably also work on method level, so I'd keep the forEntity
>> out
>> > > >>> there.
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:22 PM, John D. Ament <
>> > > >>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>> > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> Personally, I don't like this idea.
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> A DAO should do DAO stuff.
>> > > >>>>>>> A DTO should do DTO stuff.
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> The transformation of your entities into some other POJO
>> > shouldn't
>> > > >> be
>> > > >>>>>>> inside your DAO.
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> Right now, I use google guava to do DTO work on entities going
>> > back
>> > > >>> and
>> > > >>>>>>> forth over a REST API. Works well IMHO.
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> John
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>> globally my answer meant "if forEntity is sometimes
>> mandatory,
>> > > >>>>> sometimes
>> > > >>>>>>>> not this is maybe not the right place"
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>> i thought to add it to mapper config
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> > > >>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>> > > >>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > > >>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>> Making forEntity non-optional would then be redundant for
>> the
>> > > >>> regular
>> > > >>>>>>>> cases
>> > > >>>>>>>>> using the base interface, so I wouldn't. But I see that it
>> > should
>> > > >>> be
>> > > >>>>>>>>> clearly documented then as things might get confusing...
>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> do you mean you force forEntity = Person.class?
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> looks ok for me since the only constraint is to add the dto
>> > > >> types
>> > > >>>>>>>>> somewhere
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> :)
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hmm and I assumed DTOs are dead and buried :-)
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Packing this in the base interface feels kind of clunky to
>> > me -
>> > > >>>>>>> also
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> considering that there are repositories without the need
>> to
>> > > >>> extend
>> > > >>>>>>>> the
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> base
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> interface. What about something like
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Repository(forEntity = Person.class)
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @ResultMapper(entityMapper = MapperX.class, keyMapper =
>> > > >>>>>>>> MapperY.class)
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> public interface PersonRepository extends
>> > > >>>>>>> EntityRepository<PersonDto,
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk> { ... }
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Having the Entity on @Repository takes precedence and the
>> > type
>> > > >>>>>>>>> parameters
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> are in this case just for convenience.
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> just to complete this thread the main issue is not the
>> > > >>>>>>>> implementation
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> but
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the exposed API:
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityRepository<E, PK extends
>> > Serializable>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would become
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityDtoRepository<E, PK extends
>> > > >> Serializable,
>> > > >>>>>>>> Dto,
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau
>> >*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello guys,
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just used DS Data module yesturday, and I was wondering
>> if
>> > we
>> > > >>>>>>>> could
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> add a
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature allowing on-the-fly conversion to DTO.
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we could use modelmapper (or similar to
>> > convert
>> > > >>>>>>> DAO
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> return
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> values to DTO objects).
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a mapper interface to delegate to would also
>> allow
>> > > >>>>>>> people
>> > > >>>>>>>> to
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> plug
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> their own implementation in.
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> JLouis
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/1 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi John
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thnx for the message, missed that one. Looks like
>> there's
>> > a
>> > > >>>>>>>>> default
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> profile
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed (test-persistence.xml only part of the specific
>> > > >> server
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> profiles).
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will check tonight.
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:42 AM, John D. Ament <
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whoever brought in the data module, can you double
>> check
>> > > >>>>>>> your
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> tests
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license headers?
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's just your tests, but it's failing during
>> a
>> > rat
>> > > >>>>>>>>> check
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://builds.apache.org/job/DeltaSpike%20RAT-Check/org.apache.deltaspike.modules$deltaspike-data-module-impl/558/testReport/org.apache.deltaspike.data.impl/QueryResultTest/org_apache_deltaspike_data_impl_QueryResultTest/
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Louis
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --
>> > > >> Jason Porter
>> > > >> http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis
>>
>
>
Re: Data Module
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
+1 Works for me, thks
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2013/11/15 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>:
> One question is probably whether it's worth adding something like a
> MapperResolver instead of referring to the mapper class directly.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Finally found some spare time to get back to this. You can find an API
>> proposal at [1] and a sample repository at [2].
>> Suggestions?
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/tree/master/deltaspike/modules/data/api/src/main/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/api/mapping
>> [2]
>> https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/blob/master/deltaspike/modules/data/impl/src/test/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/test/service/SimpleMappedRepository.java
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 on the feature, just been busy on a project where that would have been
>>> handy.
>>>
>>> And apologies for letting the thread quiet, will I'll try to propose
>>> something over the next two weeks based on the initial API suggestion (and
>>> get some other JIRA issues finally done...).
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep, I still think it's useful.
>>>>
>>>> JLouis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/10/1 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> > Not particularly
>>>> >
>>>> > the thread ends while the feature is useful IMO so simply asking what
>>>> to do
>>>> > next ;)
>>>> >
>>>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>>> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > 2013/10/1 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>>>> >
>>>> > > Was this my action item?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Sent from my iPhone
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 7:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>>>> >
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Hi
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > any news on it?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > @ResultMapper was good to me
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>>> > > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>>> > > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>>> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>>> > > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > 2013/7/12 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > > >> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>> Ps: you can make a cdi bean an ejb from cdi extension
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >> No, the bootstrapping for each container do not communicate to my
>>>> > > >> knowledge.
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>> Le 12 juil. 2013 08:12, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>> > a
>>>> > > >>> écrit :
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>>> Hi
>>>> > > >>>>
>>>> > > >>>> Depending the case DTO are not an option.
>>>> > > >>>>
>>>> > > >>>> I agree in rest app i wouldnt it but if not possible (maybe
>>>> through
>>>> > > >>>> another Bean) it would kill this module for half of the usages
>>>> i see
>>>> > > >>> since
>>>> > > >>>> i'd need to add this layer.
>>>> > > >>>> Le 12 juil. 2013 06:55, "hantsy" <ha...@yahoo.com.cn> a écrit
>>>> :
>>>> > > >>>>
>>>> > > >>>>> No DTO please, data module for data access, why we care about
>>>> DTO.
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>> A question about the data, the difference for EJB and none EJB
>>>> > > >>>>> environment.
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>> if possible in a EJB envoriment, proxy the Repository and add
>>>> > > >> @Stateless
>>>> > > >>>>> and transaction declaration to Repository automatically at
>>>> runtime.
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>> Regards
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>> Hantsy
>>>> > > >>>>>> On 7/10/2013 23:23, Thomas Hug wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>> I wouldn't label the feature with DTO but rather as some
>>>> general
>>>> > > >>> result
>>>> > > >>>>>> transformation - might also be useful for e.g. native queries.
>>>> > Going
>>>> > > >>>>> back
>>>> > > >>>>>> to the API suggestion, from that perspective such an
>>>> annotation
>>>> > > >> should
>>>> > > >>>>>> probably also work on method level, so I'd keep the forEntity
>>>> out
>>>> > > >>> there.
>>>> > > >>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:22 PM, John D. Ament <
>>>> > > >>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>>>> > > >>>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> Personally, I don't like this idea.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> A DAO should do DAO stuff.
>>>> > > >>>>>>> A DTO should do DTO stuff.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> The transformation of your entities into some other POJO
>>>> > shouldn't
>>>> > > >> be
>>>> > > >>>>>>> inside your DAO.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> Right now, I use google guava to do DTO work on entities
>>>> going
>>>> > back
>>>> > > >>> and
>>>> > > >>>>>>> forth over a REST API. Works well IMHO.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> John
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > > >>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> globally my answer meant "if forEntity is sometimes
>>>> mandatory,
>>>> > > >>>>> sometimes
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> not this is maybe not the right place"
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> i thought to add it to mapper config
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Making forEntity non-optional would then be redundant for
>>>> the
>>>> > > >>> regular
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> cases
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> using the base interface, so I wouldn't. But I see that it
>>>> > should
>>>> > > >>> be
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> clearly documented then as things might get confusing...
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> do you mean you force forEntity = Person.class?
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> looks ok for me since the only constraint is to add the
>>>> dto
>>>> > > >> types
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hmm and I assumed DTOs are dead and buried :-)
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Packing this in the base interface feels kind of clunky
>>>> to
>>>> > me -
>>>> > > >>>>>>> also
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> considering that there are repositories without the need
>>>> to
>>>> > > >>> extend
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> the
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> base
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> interface. What about something like
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Repository(forEntity = Person.class)
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @ResultMapper(entityMapper = MapperX.class, keyMapper =
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> MapperY.class)
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> public interface PersonRepository extends
>>>> > > >>>>>>> EntityRepository<PersonDto,
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk> { ... }
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Having the Entity on @Repository takes precedence and the
>>>> > type
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> parameters
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> are in this case just for convenience.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> just to complete this thread the main issue is not the
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> implementation
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> but
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the exposed API:
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityRepository<E, PK extends
>>>> > Serializable>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would become
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityDtoRepository<E, PK extends
>>>> > > >> Serializable,
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Dto,
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau
>>>> >*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello guys,
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just used DS Data module yesturday, and I was
>>>> wondering if
>>>> > we
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> could
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> add a
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature allowing on-the-fly conversion to DTO.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we could use modelmapper (or similar to
>>>> > convert
>>>> > > >>>>>>> DAO
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> return
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> values to DTO objects).
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a mapper interface to delegate to would also
>>>> allow
>>>> > > >>>>>>> people
>>>> > > >>>>>>>> to
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> plug
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> their own implementation in.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> JLouis
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/1 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi John
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thnx for the message, missed that one. Looks like
>>>> there's
>>>> > a
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> default
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> profile
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed (test-persistence.xml only part of the specific
>>>> > > >> server
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> profiles).
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will check tonight.
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:42 AM, John D. Ament <
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whoever brought in the data module, can you double
>>>> check
>>>> > > >>>>>>> your
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> tests
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license headers?
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's just your tests, but it's failing
>>>> during a
>>>> > rat
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> check
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/DeltaSpike%20RAT-Check/org.apache.deltaspike.modules$deltaspike-data-module-impl/558/testReport/org.apache.deltaspike.data.impl/QueryResultTest/org_apache_deltaspike_data_impl_QueryResultTest/
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Louis
>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > > >> --
>>>> > > >> Jason Porter
>>>> > > >> http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp
>>>> > > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Louis
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Data Module
Posted by Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>.
One question is probably whether it's worth adding something like a
MapperResolver instead of referring to the mapper class directly.
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Finally found some spare time to get back to this. You can find an API
> proposal at [1] and a sample repository at [2].
> Suggestions?
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/tree/master/deltaspike/modules/data/api/src/main/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/api/mapping
> [2]
> https://github.com/thomashug/DeltaSpike-Mirror/blob/master/deltaspike/modules/data/impl/src/test/java/org/apache/deltaspike/data/test/service/SimpleMappedRepository.java
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on the feature, just been busy on a project where that would have been
>> handy.
>>
>> And apologies for letting the thread quiet, will I'll try to propose
>> something over the next two weeks based on the initial API suggestion (and
>> get some other JIRA issues finally done...).
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, I still think it's useful.
>>>
>>> JLouis
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/10/1 Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> > Not particularly
>>> >
>>> > the thread ends while the feature is useful IMO so simply asking what
>>> to do
>>> > next ;)
>>> >
>>> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2013/10/1 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>>> >
>>> > > Was this my action item?
>>> > >
>>> > > Sent from my iPhone
>>> > >
>>> > > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 7:43, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hi
>>> > > >
>>> > > > any news on it?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > @ResultMapper was good to me
>>> > > >
>>> > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>> > > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>> > > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>> > > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>> > > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 2013/7/12 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > >> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>> Ps: you can make a cdi bean an ejb from cdi extension
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> No, the bootstrapping for each container do not communicate to my
>>> > > >> knowledge.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>> Le 12 juil. 2013 08:12, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <
>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> > a
>>> > > >>> écrit :
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>>> Hi
>>> > > >>>>
>>> > > >>>> Depending the case DTO are not an option.
>>> > > >>>>
>>> > > >>>> I agree in rest app i wouldnt it but if not possible (maybe
>>> through
>>> > > >>>> another Bean) it would kill this module for half of the usages
>>> i see
>>> > > >>> since
>>> > > >>>> i'd need to add this layer.
>>> > > >>>> Le 12 juil. 2013 06:55, "hantsy" <ha...@yahoo.com.cn> a écrit
>>> :
>>> > > >>>>
>>> > > >>>>> No DTO please, data module for data access, why we care about
>>> DTO.
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>>> A question about the data, the difference for EJB and none EJB
>>> > > >>>>> environment.
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>>> if possible in a EJB envoriment, proxy the Repository and add
>>> > > >> @Stateless
>>> > > >>>>> and transaction declaration to Repository automatically at
>>> runtime.
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>>> Regards
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>>> Hantsy
>>> > > >>>>>> On 7/10/2013 23:23, Thomas Hug wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>> I wouldn't label the feature with DTO but rather as some
>>> general
>>> > > >>> result
>>> > > >>>>>> transformation - might also be useful for e.g. native queries.
>>> > Going
>>> > > >>>>> back
>>> > > >>>>>> to the API suggestion, from that perspective such an
>>> annotation
>>> > > >> should
>>> > > >>>>>> probably also work on method level, so I'd keep the forEntity
>>> out
>>> > > >>> there.
>>> > > >>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:22 PM, John D. Ament <
>>> > > >>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>>> > > >>>>>> wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> Personally, I don't like this idea.
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> A DAO should do DAO stuff.
>>> > > >>>>>>> A DTO should do DTO stuff.
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> The transformation of your entities into some other POJO
>>> > shouldn't
>>> > > >> be
>>> > > >>>>>>> inside your DAO.
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> Right now, I use google guava to do DTO work on entities
>>> going
>>> > back
>>> > > >>> and
>>> > > >>>>>>> forth over a REST API. Works well IMHO.
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> John
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > >>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>> globally my answer meant "if forEntity is sometimes
>>> mandatory,
>>> > > >>>>> sometimes
>>> > > >>>>>>>> not this is maybe not the right place"
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>> i thought to add it to mapper config
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>> > > >>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>> > > >>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Making forEntity non-optional would then be redundant for
>>> the
>>> > > >>> regular
>>> > > >>>>>>>> cases
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> using the base interface, so I wouldn't. But I see that it
>>> > should
>>> > > >>> be
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> clearly documented then as things might get confusing...
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> do you mean you force forEntity = Person.class?
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> looks ok for me since the only constraint is to add the
>>> dto
>>> > > >> types
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> somewhere
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> :)
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hmm and I assumed DTOs are dead and buried :-)
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Packing this in the base interface feels kind of clunky
>>> to
>>> > me -
>>> > > >>>>>>> also
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> considering that there are repositories without the need
>>> to
>>> > > >>> extend
>>> > > >>>>>>>> the
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> base
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> interface. What about something like
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Repository(forEntity = Person.class)
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @ResultMapper(entityMapper = MapperX.class, keyMapper =
>>> > > >>>>>>>> MapperY.class)
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> public interface PersonRepository extends
>>> > > >>>>>>> EntityRepository<PersonDto,
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk> { ... }
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Having the Entity on @Repository takes precedence and the
>>> > type
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> parameters
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> are in this case just for convenience.
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> just to complete this thread the main issue is not the
>>> > > >>>>>>>> implementation
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> but
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the exposed API:
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityRepository<E, PK extends
>>> > Serializable>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would become
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public interface EntityDtoRepository<E, PK extends
>>> > > >> Serializable,
>>> > > >>>>>>>> Dto,
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> DtoPk>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau
>>> >*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/10 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <je...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello guys,
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just used DS Data module yesturday, and I was
>>> wondering if
>>> > we
>>> > > >>>>>>>> could
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> add a
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature allowing on-the-fly conversion to DTO.
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we could use modelmapper (or similar to
>>> > convert
>>> > > >>>>>>> DAO
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> return
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> values to DTO objects).
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a mapper interface to delegate to would also
>>> allow
>>> > > >>>>>>> people
>>> > > >>>>>>>> to
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> plug
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> their own implementation in.
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> JLouis
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013/7/1 Thomas Hug <th...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi John
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thnx for the message, missed that one. Looks like
>>> there's
>>> > a
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> default
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> profile
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed (test-persistence.xml only part of the specific
>>> > > >> server
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> profiles).
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will check tonight.
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:42 AM, John D. Ament <
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> john.d.ament@gmail.com
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whoever brought in the data module, can you double
>>> check
>>> > > >>>>>>> your
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> tests
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> license headers?
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's just your tests, but it's failing
>>> during a
>>> > rat
>>> > > >>>>>>>>> check
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/DeltaSpike%20RAT-Check/org.apache.deltaspike.modules$deltaspike-data-module-impl/558/testReport/org.apache.deltaspike.data.impl/QueryResultTest/org_apache_deltaspike_data_impl_QueryResultTest/
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Louis
>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>>>
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> --
>>> > > >> Jason Porter
>>> > > >> http://en.gravatar.com/lightguardjp
>>> > > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis
>>>
>>
>>
>