You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by "Gerhard Petracek (JIRA)" <de...@myfaces.apache.org> on 2010/09/18 17:49:33 UTC
[jira] Created: (EXTCDI-57) revisit Conversation#end
revisit Conversation#end
------------------------
Key: EXTCDI-57
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EXTCDI-57
Project: MyFaces CODI
Issue Type: Task
Components: JEE-JSF12-Module, JEE-JSF20-Module
Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
we should think about the naming of this important api, because std. cdi conversations offer the same method.
codi conversations are very similar to orchestra conversations.
in orchestra #end means that the conversation gets terminated immediately.
currently we have the same with codi conversations.
if we would like to add an additional api which terminates the conversation after the rendering process (= behavior of std. cdi conversations), we would have to introduce a name which might confuse users.
we have the following options:
#1:
renaming #end to #close -> it's more clear to users that it works differently (compared to std. cdi conversations).
so we still have #end if we add an additional api for terminating the conversation at the end of the request.
if we won't introduce the additional api, we still have a method which indicates that the termination process works differently compared to std. cdi conversations.
the only disadvantage is that it isn't intuitive for users who used orchestra.
#2:
keeping the current api (#end) for terminating the conversation immediately. so we will need a name for an api which ends the conversation after the rendering process.
(we could use #close. but then we have #end which works differently (compared to std. cdi conversations) and #close also doesn't really express the difference (and other names might sound strange). so we might end up with confused users.)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
AW: [jira] Created: (EXTCDI-57) revisit Conversation#end
Posted by Mario Ivankovits <ma...@ops.co.at>.
+1 for #1
Yes, is is obvious that close() closes immediately.
Ciao,
Mario
Von: Gerhard [mailto:gerhard.petracek@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 18. September 2010 17:52
An: MyFaces Development
Betreff: Re: [jira] Created: (EXTCDI-57) revisit Conversation#end
+1 for #1
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2010/9/18 Gerhard Petracek (JIRA) <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
revisit Conversation#end
------------------------
Key: EXTCDI-57
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EXTCDI-57
Project: MyFaces CODI
Issue Type: Task
Components: JEE-JSF12-Module, JEE-JSF20-Module
Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
we should think about the naming of this important api, because std. cdi
conversations offer the same method.
codi conversations are very similar to orchestra conversations.
in orchestra #end means that the conversation gets terminated immediately.
currently we have the same with codi conversations.
if we would like to add an additional api which terminates the conversation
after the rendering process (= behavior of std. cdi conversations), we would
have to introduce a name which might confuse users.
we have the following options:
#1:
renaming #end to #close -> it's more clear to users that it works
differently (compared to std. cdi conversations).
so we still have #end if we add an additional api for terminating the
conversation at the end of the request.
if we won't introduce the additional api, we still have a method which
indicates that the termination process works differently compared to std.
cdi conversations.
the only disadvantage is that it isn't intuitive for users who used
orchestra.
#2:
keeping the current api (#end) for terminating the conversation immediately.
so we will need a name for an api which ends the conversation after the
rendering process.
(we could use #close. but then we have #end which works differently
(compared to std. cdi conversations) and #close also doesn't really express
the difference (and other names might sound strange). so we might end up
with confused users.)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [jira] Created: (EXTCDI-57) revisit Conversation#end
Posted by Gerhard <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1 for #1
regards,
gerhard
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German
Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
2010/9/18 Gerhard Petracek (JIRA) <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
> revisit Conversation#end
> ------------------------
>
> Key: EXTCDI-57
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EXTCDI-57
> Project: MyFaces CODI
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: JEE-JSF12-Module, JEE-JSF20-Module
> Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
>
>
> we should think about the naming of this important api, because std. cdi
> conversations offer the same method.
>
> codi conversations are very similar to orchestra conversations.
>
> in orchestra #end means that the conversation gets terminated immediately.
> currently we have the same with codi conversations.
>
> if we would like to add an additional api which terminates the conversation
> after the rendering process (= behavior of std. cdi conversations), we would
> have to introduce a name which might confuse users.
>
> we have the following options:
>
> #1:
> renaming #end to #close -> it's more clear to users that it works
> differently (compared to std. cdi conversations).
> so we still have #end if we add an additional api for terminating the
> conversation at the end of the request.
> if we won't introduce the additional api, we still have a method which
> indicates that the termination process works differently compared to std.
> cdi conversations.
> the only disadvantage is that it isn't intuitive for users who used
> orchestra.
>
> #2:
> keeping the current api (#end) for terminating the conversation
> immediately. so we will need a name for an api which ends the conversation
> after the rendering process.
> (we could use #close. but then we have #end which works differently
> (compared to std. cdi conversations) and #close also doesn't really express
> the difference (and other names might sound strange). so we might end up
> with confused users.)
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
>
[jira] Resolved: (EXTCDI-57) revisit Conversation#end
Posted by "Gerhard Petracek (JIRA)" <de...@myfaces.apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EXTCDI-57?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Gerhard Petracek resolved EXTCDI-57.
------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT
Resolution: Fixed
> revisit Conversation#end
> ------------------------
>
> Key: EXTCDI-57
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EXTCDI-57
> Project: MyFaces CODI
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: JEE-JSF12-Module, JEE-JSF20-Module
> Reporter: Gerhard Petracek
> Fix For: 1.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>
>
> we should think about the naming of this important api, because std. cdi conversations offer the same method.
> codi conversations are very similar to orchestra conversations.
> in orchestra #end means that the conversation gets terminated immediately.
> currently we have the same with codi conversations.
> if we would like to add an additional api which terminates the conversation after the rendering process (= behavior of std. cdi conversations), we would have to introduce a name which might confuse users.
> we have the following options:
> #1:
> renaming #end to #close -> it's more clear to users that it works differently (compared to std. cdi conversations).
> so we still have #end if we add an additional api for terminating the conversation at the end of the request.
> if we won't introduce the additional api, we still have a method which indicates that the termination process works differently compared to std. cdi conversations.
> the only disadvantage is that it isn't intuitive for users who used orchestra.
> #2:
> keeping the current api (#end) for terminating the conversation immediately. so we will need a name for an api which ends the conversation after the rendering process.
> (we could use #close. but then we have #end which works differently (compared to std. cdi conversations) and #close also doesn't really express the difference (and other names might sound strange). so we might end up with confused users.)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.