maybe packaging it with such modules is more relevent: -> deltaspike-tx (@Transactional, jta), no link to jpa -> deltaspike-jpa (potentially resource local management)
wdyt? - Romain 2012/6/27 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > For today while DS is "small" sure. > > Note: a bundle deltaspike-all is still welcome i think. > > - Romain > Le 27 juin 2012 20:08, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Ok, I understand that point. Would it be fine to just have them in >> separated packages? >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >________________________________ >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >> >To: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>; >> [email protected] >> >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:53 PM >> >Subject: Re: cdi-query >> > >> > >> >Not really, myfaces is not here. >> >And you are as bas as me wanting to impose your view Mark. >> >One jar by purpose is easier to maintain or patch too...one jar by class >> is a pain. >> >On the ee/jee i think it is important to split to ease people to >> understand what they use. >> >- Romain >> >Le 27 juin 2012 19:24, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a écrit : >> > >> >This is a perfectly bad example! With this shaded jar you cannot easily >> upgrade single projects like MyFaces to a newer version... >> >> >> >>LieGrue, >> >>strub >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >>> Cc: >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:22 PM >> >>> Subject: Re: cdi-query >> >>> >> >>> javaee-api in openejb for instance: >> >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/trunk/javaee-api/pom.xml >> >>> >> >>> - Romain >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 2012/6/27 Pete Muir <[email protected]> >> >>> >> >>>> Do you have some good examples of shade working well, I've never >> ever >> >>> seen >> >>>> it be a good approach for frameworks. >> >>>> >> >>>> On 27 Jun 2012, at 11:17, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> > @Pete: DS can deliver fine grain modules which are nice for some >> part >> >>> of >> >>>> > the users and shade modules ("big jar") for advances user. >> >>> Just a maven >> >>>> > trick. this way everuone is happy and honestly today any nice IDE >> >>>> supports >> >>>> > it without any issue. >> >>>> > >> >>>> > - Romain >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > 2012/6/27 Pete Muir <[email protected]> >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> It's insanely complex for a new user. Java is already >> >>> confusing, with >> >>>> it's >> >>>> >> hundreds of libs. Adding more complexity to packaging won't >> >>> help with >> >>>> >> DeltaSpike adoption IMO. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> On 27 Jun 2012, at 07:58, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>> Mark, >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> what's the issue? The thing to take care is to not create >> >>> a module >> >>>> simply >> >>>> >>> for integration. But a module by feature is fine and nice IMO. >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> - Romain >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> 2012/6/27 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> Romain, Arne. >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> Please make suggestions which classes/features we should >> >>> push into >> >>>> which >> >>>> >>>> module. Any suggestion is welcome >> >>>> >>>> I think our whole JPA functionality is not that huge and >> >>> are just 30 >> >>>> >>>> classes overall. Splitting those into 6 modules (3x api + >> >>> impl each) >> >>>> >> might >> >>>> >>>> really be too much! >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> LieGrue, >> >>>> >>>> strub >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >> >>>> >>>>> From: Arne Limburg >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>> To: "[email protected]" >> >>> < >> >>>> >>>> [email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 1:07 PM >> >>>> >>>>> Subject: AW: cdi-query >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> I completely agree with Romain on that topic >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> >>>> >>>>> Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] >> >>>> >>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2012 11:46 >> >>>> >>>>> An: [email protected] >> >>>> >>>>> Betreff: Re: cdi-query >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> Still not totally agree on modules stuff (should it be >> >>> pushed in >> >>>> >> another >> >>>> >>>> thread?), in particular from a user perspective. I think >> >>> allowing >> >>>> users >> >>>> >> to >> >>>> >>>> take small bundle or an already aggregated one (shade) is >> >>> a great >> >>>> >> feature. >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> - Romain >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> 2012/6/27 Thomas Hug >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> @Mark, +1 on not being excessive on the amount of >> >>> modules. As a >> >>>> user I >> >>>> >>>>>> don't think I'd like maintaining another x >> >>> dependencies, those POMs >> >>>> >>>>>> are usually big enough :-) Anyway, depending on >> >>> the amount of >> >>>> features >> >>>> >>>>>> integrating for such a query API, that might well >> >>> fall into the >> >>>> >>>>>> "decent size" category. >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> @Pete, +1 for the ServiceHandler - IMO very >> >>> convenient when using >> >>>> >>>>>> methods just as metadata (e.g. for calling stored >> >>> procs, obviously >> >>>> JPA >> >>>> >>>>>> queries or a JAX-RS client). >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> @Jason, Bernard: Agree that I have rarely used the >> >>> Home API in a >> >>>> >>>>>> productive application, still I found it quite >> >>> handy for >> >>>> prototyping. >> >>>> >>>>>> Could be useful to add this on top of a query API >> >>> (and create e.g. a >> >>>> >>>>>> Forge scaffolding provider?). >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >> >>>> >>>>>> Tom >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> >>>>>> From: Mark Struberg [mailto:[email protected]] >> >>>> >>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 26. Juni 2012 07:58 >> >>>> >>>>>> To: [email protected] >> >>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: cdi-query >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> I fear that would get us into jarmageddon... >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> We discussed the module structure at the very >> >>> beginning, and we all >> >>>> >>>>>> concluded that there are 2 reasons for introducing >> >>> a new module: >> >>>> >>>>>> .) a dependency to another project or EE api (like >> >>> jta, jpa, jsf) >> >>>> >>>>>> .) an area which is an completely own block and >> >>> has a decent size >> >>>> (min >> >>>> >>>>>> ~30..50 new classes) >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Since the whole JPA area doesn't have more >> >>> than 10 classes yet, I do >> >>>> >>>>>> not see a reason for introducing a new API for >> >>> them. >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Also the whole EE vs SE is moot imo. Either we >> >>> have a new API or >> >>>> not. >> >>>> >>>>>> The classic J2EE patterns are dead dead dead >> >>> anyway. EE-6 gave us >> >>>> much >> >>>> >>>>>> better possibilities, so we should use them and >> >>> not fall back to >> >>>> _old_ >> >>>> >>>> EE patterns. >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> What we could do is to disucss whether the >> >>> 'jta' module would better >> >>>> >>>>>> called 'deltaspike-jpa-ee' and not only >> >>> contain JTA but also >> >>>> >>>>>> TransactionAttributeType handling from EJB? >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> LieGrue, >> >>>> >>>>>> strub >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>>> >>>>>>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >> >>>> >>>>>>> Cc: >> >>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:30 AM >> >>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: cdi-query >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> +1 >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> - Romain >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> 2012/6/26 Gerhard Petracek >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> @ pete: >> >>>> >>>>>>>> +1 >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> @ java-se vs java-ee features: >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> we can think about a more fine-grained >> >>> structure (similar to >> >>>> seam3). >> >>>> >>>>>>>> e.g.: >> >>>> >>>>>>>> deltaspike-jpa-transaction >> >>>> >>>>>>>> deltaspike-jpa-query >> >>>> >>>>>>>> ... >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> regards, >> >>>> >>>>>>>> gerhard >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> 2012/6/25 Pete Muir >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, we were looking for some good >> >>> use cases for the >> >>>> >>>> ServiceHandler. >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> I would be in support of adding it to >> >>> DS core, now we have a >> >>>> >>>>>>>> strong >> >>>> >>>>>>> use >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> case. >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Property util should not be >> >>> controversial. Maybe we can improve >> >>>> >>>>>>> it's API >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> whilst we are at it :-) >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> On 25 Jun 2012, at 10:25, Thomas Hug >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Eventually this came in a little >> >>> early, but it's already on >> >>>> >>>>>>> the radar: >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-60 >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> The current implementation mainly >> >>> depends on the Solder >> >>>> >>>>>>> ServiceHandler >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> (as far as I remember not yet in DS, >> >>> waiting for CDI 1.1) and >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the Property > utils. >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tom >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>> ________________________________________ >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Von: Mark Struberg >> >>> [[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Montag, >> >>>> >>>>>>>> 25. Juni 2012 14:21 > > An: >> >>> [email protected] >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: cdi-query >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 great stuff to review and add >> >>> them! >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> That would fit great into the >> >>> deltaspike-jpa module, wdyt? >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> LieGrue, >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> strub >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> From: Pete Muir >> >>> <[email protected]> > >> To: >> >>>> >>>>>>>> [email protected] >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cc: >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 >> >>> 1:53 PM > >> Subject: Re: >> >>>> >>>>>>>> cdi-query > >> > >> >> >>> IMO this would be a great thing to add! >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 24 Jun 2012, at 16:56, >> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> just browsed >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> http://ctpconsulting.github.com/query/1.0.0.Alpha4/index.html >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> and >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it is really amazing (a >> >>> spring-data CDI oriented). >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> it is currently based on >> >>> solder but since DS integrates a >> >>>> >>>>>>> lot of this >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> stuff >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> i wonder if it could be >> >>> integrated in DS in a really >> >>>> >>>>>>> portable way? >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Romain >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>>> >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > >> >
