FWIW, Simone and I had, in the past, discussed privately whether some tree of post-compilation tools might make a sensible family of commons component modules. We had originally been thinking along the lines of JDK6 annotation processors, which [*privilizer] is not (no open API exists allowing these to modify bytecode), but the basic principle applies... Note that [attributes] was/is more or less this type of component.
Matt On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > +1 > > It might fit to any component which does _not_ introduce a runtime > dependency but is only needed at compile time. Basically the privilizer is > kind of a preprocessor. > > If such a kind of component already exists in commons, then we can look if > it fits to the business of this component. Otherwise it's a new module imo. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > > To: Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > > Cc: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:08 PM > > Subject: Re: [privilizer] promotion plan > > > > Hi Gary, > > Feel free to suggest one or more alternate names, and we can vote on > > them! The intent is to quickly convey that the component "equips your > code > > to run in a Java security constrained environment," thus > > "privilizer" or > > "that which makes your code privileged." Since the main use of the > > component is to instrument compiled code during the build process (a > > possible future enhancement is to support RT enhancement in a custom > > classloader), I don't see that it fits into any existing component, but > am > > open to correction. > > > > Thanks for your interest, > > Matt > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Gary Gregory > > <garydgreg...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > >> Another aspect to consider is would this new "privalizer" > > component (not > >> crazy about the name ATM) fit in an existing Commons component? > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> As long as I've been part of the Commons community I don't > > know that > >>> I've > >>> encountered this exact situation: a committer adds some code to the > >>> sandbox that is more or less complete. I don't know precisely what > >>> requirements must be met before we promote [privilizer] to proper. We > > seem > >>> to have interest from one or more members of the PMC as prospective > > users; > >>> this would seem to imply that were I hit by a bus there ought to be > >>> someone > >>> interested in maintaining the component. Speaking for BVal I intend > to > >>> put > >>> this component to immediate use there (that's what I wrote it > > for!). Mark > >>> has mentioned that OWB and perhaps other ASF projects might want to > > make > >>> use of it. What else do I need to do? > >>> > >>> Matt > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > >> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0 > >> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK > >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ > >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
