You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@deltaspike.apache.org by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com> on 2011/12/19 14:13:59 UTC
[DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
hi @ all,
fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
[2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
the basic concept:
via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
please send
+1, +0 or -1 because...
for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
regards,
gerhard
[1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
[2]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
[3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
[4]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
+0.5 e.g. for the name @ActivatedOnProjectStage, if we can also agree on
@ActivatedOnExpression for [1].
regards,
gerhard
[1] http://s.apache.org/MeX
2011/12/19 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> +1
> (we could think about a different name)
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2011/12/19 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
>
>> hi @ all,
>>
>> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>>
>> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>>
>> the basic concept:
>> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
>> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>>
>> please send
>> +1, +0 or -1 because...
>> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
>> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
>> [2]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
>> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
>> [4]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1
(we could think about a different name)
regards,
gerhard
2011/12/19 Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> hi @ all,
>
> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>
> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>
> the basic concept:
> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>
> please send
> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> [4]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
+1
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 19, 2011, at 6:13, Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi @ all,
>
> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>
> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>
> the basic concept:
> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>
> please send
> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> [4]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
Yeah I saw that yesterday. Trying to go through the week of backlog and forgot :)
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 3, 2012, at 14:16, Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi jason,
>
> we are currently discussing an alternative approach (see the discussion
> about ExpressionActivated).
>
> since this approach would merge 3 features, it might be useful to start a
> new thread.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/1/3 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
>
>> +1 to @ProjectStageActivated
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 03:13, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>
>>> In practice @ProjectStageActivated was quite a killer feature which was
>>> used _very_ often.
>>>
>>> In big projects you pretty often have the situation that you need to do
>>> quite a few things different in the UnitTests, on the internal test
>> servers
>>> and on prodution servers!
>>>
>>>
>>> We for example just mocked our MailService out with a
>>>
>>> @ProjectStageActivated(UnitTest.class) @Alternative public class
>>> DummyMailService
>>>
>>>
>>> which just logs the mails instead trashing our real mail servers...
>>>
>>> We also switch between different authentication implementations for our
>>> test servers and production.
>>>
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
>>>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 2:14 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
>>>>
>>>> My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage.
>>>> ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the
>>>> enterprise level).
>>>> However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this.
>>> Focusing
>>>> on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration,
>>> so
>>>> +1 for ProjectStageActivated
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
>>> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> christian sent his opinion about the name.
>>>>>
>>>>> @others:
>>>>> please also send your opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> thx & regards,
>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 for the basic concept
>>>>>> +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hi @ all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the basic concept:
>>>>>>>> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible
>>>> to veto bean
>>>>>>>> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> please send
>>>>>>>> +1, +0 or -1 because...
>>>>>>>> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
>>>>>>>> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them
>>>> to [4]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
>>>>>>>> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
>>>>>>>> [4]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Christian Kaltepoth
>>>>>> Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
>>>>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jason Porter
>> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>>
>> Software Engineer
>> Open Source Advocate
>> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>>
>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
hi jason,
we are currently discussing an alternative approach (see the discussion
about ExpressionActivated).
since this approach would merge 3 features, it might be useful to start a
new thread.
regards,
gerhard
2012/1/3 Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>
> +1 to @ProjectStageActivated
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 03:13, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> > In practice @ProjectStageActivated was quite a killer feature which was
> > used _very_ often.
> >
> > In big projects you pretty often have the situation that you need to do
> > quite a few things different in the UnitTests, on the internal test
> servers
> > and on prodution servers!
> >
> >
> > We for example just mocked our MailService out with a
> >
> > @ProjectStageActivated(UnitTest.class) @Alternative public class
> > DummyMailService
> >
> >
> > which just logs the mails instead trashing our real mail servers...
> >
> > We also switch between different authentication implementations for our
> > test servers and production.
> >
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> > > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 2:14 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
> > >
> > > My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage.
> > > ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the
> > > enterprise level).
> > > However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this.
> > Focusing
> > > on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration,
> > so
> > > +1 for ProjectStageActivated
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> > gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> > >> wrote:
> > >
> > >> hi,
> > >>
> > >> christian sent his opinion about the name.
> > >>
> > >> @others:
> > >> please also send your opinion.
> > >>
> > >> thx & regards,
> > >> gerhard
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
> > >>
> > >> > +1 for the basic concept
> > >> > +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > +1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> hi @ all,
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> the basic concept:
> > >> > >> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible
> > > to veto bean
> > >> > >> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> please send
> > >> > >> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> > >> > >> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> > >> > >> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them
> > > to [4]
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> regards,
> > >> > >> gerhard
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> > >> > >> [2]
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> > >> > >> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> > >> > >> [4]
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Christian Kaltepoth
> > >> > Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
> > >> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Porter
> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>
> Software Engineer
> Open Source Advocate
> Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
>
> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Jason Porter <li...@gmail.com>.
+1 to @ProjectStageActivated
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 03:13, Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> In practice @ProjectStageActivated was quite a killer feature which was
> used _very_ often.
>
> In big projects you pretty often have the situation that you need to do
> quite a few things different in the UnitTests, on the internal test servers
> and on prodution servers!
>
>
> We for example just mocked our MailService out with a
>
> @ProjectStageActivated(UnitTest.class) @Alternative public class
> DummyMailService
>
>
> which just logs the mails instead trashing our real mail servers...
>
> We also switch between different authentication implementations for our
> test servers and production.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 2:14 AM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
> >
> > My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage.
> > ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the
> > enterprise level).
> > However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this.
> Focusing
> > on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration,
> so
> > +1 for ProjectStageActivated
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
> gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> hi,
> >>
> >> christian sent his opinion about the name.
> >>
> >> @others:
> >> please also send your opinion.
> >>
> >> thx & regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
> >>
> >> > +1 for the basic concept
> >> > +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> hi @ all,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> the basic concept:
> >> > >> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible
> > to veto bean
> >> > >> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
> >> > >>
> >> > >> please send
> >> > >> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> >> > >> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> >> > >> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them
> > to [4]
> >> > >>
> >> > >> regards,
> >> > >> gerhard
> >> > >>
> >> > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> >> > >> [2]
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> >> > >> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> >> > >> [4]
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Christian Kaltepoth
> >> > Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
> >> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
--
Jason Porter
http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling
PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
In practice @ProjectStageActivated was quite a killer feature which was used _very_ often.
In big projects you pretty often have the situation that you need to do quite a few things different in the UnitTests, on the internal test servers and on prodution servers!
We for example just mocked our MailService out with a
@ProjectStageActivated(UnitTest.class) @Alternative public class DummyMailService
which just logs the mails instead trashing our real mail servers...
We also switch between different authentication implementations for our test servers and production.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com>
> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, January 2, 2012 2:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
>
> My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage.
> ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the
> enterprise level).
> However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this. Focusing
> on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration, so
> +1 for ProjectStageActivated
>
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> hi,
>>
>> christian sent his opinion about the name.
>>
>> @others:
>> please also send your opinion.
>>
>> thx & regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
>>
>> > +1 for the basic concept
>> > +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> hi @ all,
>> > >>
>> > >> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>> > >>
>> > >> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>> > >>
>> > >> the basic concept:
>> > >> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible
> to veto bean
>> > >> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>> > >>
>> > >> please send
>> > >> +1, +0 or -1 because...
>> > >> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
>> > >> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them
> to [4]
>> > >>
>> > >> regards,
>> > >> gerhard
>> > >>
>> > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
>> > >> [2]
>> > >>
>> >
>>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
>> > >> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
>> > >> [4]
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Christian Kaltepoth
>> > Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
>> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>> >
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@gmail.com>.
My personal preference is against any behavior based on project stage.
ends up with some bad developer coding (at least my experience at the
enterprise level).
However, I do not think we should remove the feature due to this. Focusing
on just the name, I think anything -ed makes sense for CDI integration, so
+1 for ProjectStageActivated
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com
> wrote:
> hi,
>
> christian sent his opinion about the name.
>
> @others:
> please also send your opinion.
>
> thx & regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
>
> > +1 for the basic concept
> > +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
> >
> >
> > 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> > >
> > >> hi @ all,
> > >>
> > >> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
> > >>
> > >> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
> > >>
> > >> the basic concept:
> > >> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> > >> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
> > >>
> > >> please send
> > >> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> > >> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> > >> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
> > >>
> > >> regards,
> > >> gerhard
> > >>
> > >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> > >> [2]
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> > >> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> > >> [4]
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Christian Kaltepoth
> > Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>.
hi,
christian sent his opinion about the name.
@others:
please also send your opinion.
thx & regards,
gerhard
2011/12/20 Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>
> +1 for the basic concept
> +0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
>
>
> 2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
> > +1
> >
> > On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> >
> >> hi @ all,
> >>
> >> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
> >>
> >> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
> >>
> >> the basic concept:
> >> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> >> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
> >>
> >> please send
> >> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> >> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> >> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> gerhard
> >>
> >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> >> [2]
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> >> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> >> [4]
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Christian Kaltepoth
> Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Christian Kaltepoth <ch...@kaltepoth.de>.
+1 for the basic concept
+0 for the annotation name. We could think about an alternative.
2011/12/20 Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>
>> hi @ all,
>>
>> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>>
>> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>>
>> the basic concept:
>> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
>> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>>
>> please send
>> +1, +0 or -1 because...
>> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
>> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
>> [2]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
>> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
>> [4]
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>
--
Christian Kaltepoth
Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Marius Bogoevici <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1
On 2011-12-19, at 8:13 AM, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
> hi @ all,
>
> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>
> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>
> the basic concept:
> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>
> please send
> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> [4]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de>.
+1
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerhard Petracek <ge...@gmail.com>
> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 2:13 PM
> Subject: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-6] ProjectStageActivated
>
> hi @ all,
>
> fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
>
> [2] provides a short introduction as well as the basic usage.
>
> the basic concept:
> via the annotation @ProjectStageActivated it's possible to veto bean
> implementations based on the current project-stage [3].
>
> please send
> +1, +0 or -1 because...
> for the basic idea as well as the basic concept.
> if there are >basic< objections, please also add them to [4]
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/7yefspfuvtz4jvmp
> [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/EXTCDI/Core+Usage#CoreUsage-@ProjectStageActivated
> [3] http://s.apache.org/5hw
> [4]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DeltaSpike/SE+Feature+Ranking
>