please feel free to propose a better name. If we agree on a new one, then I'm happy to rename it.
LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2012 4:03 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] bootstrap api > > @module name: > i agree with pete! here is my -0.5 for "container" in the name. > imo we need a name which makes clear that this module is just needed with > java-se. > > furthermore, we should use unified names for the test modules. > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2012/2/18 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > >> +1 >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >> >> >> >> 2012/2/18 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> >>> Hi folks! >>> >>> I've now drafted a first version of the API >>> >>> >>> > https://github.com/struberg/incubator-deltaspike/blob/containerctrl/deltaspike/containerctrl/api/src/main/java/org/apache/deltaspike/containerctrl/api/ContainerControl.java >>> >>> wdyt? >>> >>> I think it's now clear that we only need this for built-in scopes, > but >>> it's really nice to provide that way. >>> Pete, I don't get the argument with CDI<T> because it > doesn't offer >>> anything close to the functionality of the ContainerControl. >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> > From: Pete Muir <[email protected]> >>> > To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg < >>> [email protected]> >>> > Cc: >>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:31 PM >>> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] bootstrap api >>> > >>> > Aha, so this is "mixing" bootstrap and context lifecycle > management? >>> > If so, I would prefer we keep these as two separate APIs. I can > make a >>> proposal >>> > for a context lifecycle management api based on what we have in > Weld. >>> > >>> > On 15 Feb 2012, at 17:17, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> > >>> >> Hi Pete! >>> >> >>> >> fluent api is fine for me. >>> >> >>> >> The reason why the context control is so fine granular is > that you >>> > don't have any well defined extension points in an SE app. > Thus the >>> > application must perform those steps itself. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Imagine a Swing App. >>> >> A Request could be a user interaction. >>> >> >>> >> A Conversation could start when a multi-page dialogue gets > opened and >>> ends >>> > when it will finally be stored. >>> >> etc. >>> >> Of course for custom scopes this needs to be refined or the > Extension >>> > providing this scope must allow us to control this. >>> >> >>> >> LieGrue, >>> >> strub >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>> From: Pete Muir <[email protected]> >>> >>> To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg >>> > <[email protected]> >>> >>> Cc: >>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:59 PM >>> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] bootstrap api >>> >>> >>> >>> My first thoughts: >>> >>> >>> >>> * the API should be fluent - always return an instance of > the >>> bootstrap >>> > API >>> >>> class >>> >>> * I would prefer to avoid the use of the word container, > on the whole >>> > the spec >>> >>> avoids that term as it's overloaded >>> >>> * I'm unsure of why you want to start the contexts > with such >>> > granularity, >>> >>> and want to understand the use cases better. I'm not > really sure >>> > why you >>> >>> want to control this outside the main start/stop > methods... >>> >>> * I would prefer start/stop to boot/shutdown - again, > slightly less >>> > meaning >>> >>> attached to the terms which might be confusing >>> >>> * Make sure that this class has the same methods as the > CDI class >>> from >>> > CDI 1.1, >>> >>> so that we don't make people change their API too > much >>> >>> >>> >>> On 10 Feb 2012, at 17:35, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi! >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Thats perfectly fine. Keep the ideas rolling ;) >>> >>>> >>> >>>> The original API was intended for doing a quick cdi > boot for unit >>> > testing, >>> >>> thus it might miss some features. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> LieGrue, >>> >>>> strub >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>>>> From: Pete Muir <[email protected]> >>> >>>>> To: [email protected]; Mark > Struberg >>> >>> <[email protected]> >>> >>>>> Cc: >>> >>>>> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:11 PM >>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] bootstrap api >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> +1 to the idea but I would want to discuss the > API in quite a >>> > lot of >>> >>> detail. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> On 9 Feb 2012, at 10:13, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> Hi! >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> I developed an API to bootstrap and control > CDI containers >>> > from >>> >>> within a SE >>> >>>>> application [1]. >>> >>>>>> This was originally developed to make > OpenWebBeans SE >>> > applications >>> >>> easily >>> >>>>> testable, but it also can be used for SE > applications in >>> > general! >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> There is already an implementation for > OpenWebBeans [2] and >>> > it >>> >>> would be >>> >>>>> really easy to also provide the same for various > Weld versions. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> wdyt? Could be nice to import this as >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> core/bootstrap/api >>> >>>>>> core/bootstrap/owb >>> >>>>>> and add a new >>> >>>>>> core/bootstrap/weld >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> LieGrue, >>> >>>>>> strub >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> [1] >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/trunk/webbeans-test/cditest/src/main/java/org/apache/webbeans/cditest/ >>> >>>>>> [2] >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openwebbeans/trunk/webbeans-test/cditest-owb/ >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> >> >> >
