You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> on 2016/01/31 12:59:17 UTC

moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

hi folks!

While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate the new SPI by moving the minor number?

I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am also fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up for CDI-2.0 officially.

Any thoughts?

LieGrue,
strub

Re: moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1 for 1.7
imo there is no need to stick with 1.6.x

regards,
gerhard



2016-01-31 16:42 GMT+01:00 Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>:

> +1 for 1.7
> but as romain said, i'm also very sure this is rarely used by users.
>
> 2016-01-31 16:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
>
> > +1 for what? staying with 1.6.x or moving to 1.7.x?
> >
> > txs and LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > > Am 31.01.2016 um 13:06 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <
> > andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > 2016-01-31 12:59 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> > >
> > >> hi folks!
> > >>
> > >> While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of
> > >> ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
> > >> While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new
> > >> BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate
> the
> > new
> > >> SPI by moving the minor number?
> > >>
> > >> I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am
> also
> > >> fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up
> > for
> > >> CDI-2.0 officially.
> > >>
> > >> Any thoughts?
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,
> > >> strub
> >
> >
>

Re: moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
+1 for 1.7
but as romain said, i'm also very sure this is rarely used by users.

2016-01-31 16:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:

> +1 for what? staying with 1.6.x or moving to 1.7.x?
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
> > Am 31.01.2016 um 13:06 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <
> andraschko.thomas@gmail.com>:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > 2016-01-31 12:59 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> >
> >> hi folks!
> >>
> >> While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of
> >> ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
> >> While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new
> >> BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate the
> new
> >> SPI by moving the minor number?
> >>
> >> I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am also
> >> fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up
> for
> >> CDI-2.0 officially.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts?
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
>
>

Re: moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
+1 for what? staying with 1.6.x or moving to 1.7.x?

txs and LieGrue,
strub

> Am 31.01.2016 um 13:06 schrieb Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>:
> 
> +1
> 
> 2016-01-31 12:59 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
> 
>> hi folks!
>> 
>> While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of
>> ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
>> While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new
>> BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate the new
>> SPI by moving the minor number?
>> 
>> I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am also
>> fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up for
>> CDI-2.0 officially.
>> 
>> Any thoughts?
>> 
>> LieGrue,
>> strub

Re: moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
1.6.3 is good since it is rarely used by *users*.

Also not sure we need both SPI since we have bba handling elsewhere and I
think scanner service responsability should stay lower level than bda which
is a CDI thing to make it useful - keep integration with other filesystems
typically.
Le 31 janv. 2016 13:06, "Thomas Andraschko" <an...@gmail.com> a
écrit :

> +1
>
> 2016-01-31 12:59 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:
>
> > hi folks!
> >
> > While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of
> > ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
> > While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new
> > BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate the
> new
> > SPI by moving the minor number?
> >
> > I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am also
> > fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up for
> > CDI-2.0 officially.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
>

Re: moving to owb-1.7.0-SNAPSHOT?

Posted by Thomas Andraschko <an...@gmail.com>.
+1

2016-01-31 12:59 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>:

> hi folks!
>
> While implementing OWB-1107 I had to introduce a subinterface of
> ScannerService called ‚BdaScannerService‘
> While OWB deployer works find with both old ScannerService and new
> BdaScannerService SPI impls it might probably be better to indicate the new
> SPI by moving the minor number?
>
> I personally can live with keeping 1.6.3 as next version. But I am also
> fine with 1.7.x as we really introduced a few new things which are up for
> CDI-2.0 officially.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub