Hi Romain, You're correct, there's a lot of useful abstract classes in impl that could be API. Makes it easier to build extensions.
But on my original question, I forgot all about PropertyFileConfig which is for my use case. I also just stumbled on to the fact that https://deltaspike.apache.org/documentation/configuration.html isn't linked from the documentation landing page (which explains a few other pain points). I'll fix shortly. John On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 9:33 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi John, > > think it is true for most of your ConfigSource[Provider] base classes in > config-impl. I got the need of MapConfigSource for instance and needed to > "duplicate" it several time. Think it is time to move several helpers we > use internally to the API since users can need them as well. Surely few > cosmetic to change (adding some constructor probably) but can worth it. > > (in other terms: +1) > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber > <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2016-08-21 15:28 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: > > > Hi, > > > > I have a use case for leveraging something > > like EnvironmentPropertyConfigSourceProvider to load multiple property > > files, outside of apache-deltaspike.properties. Right now its package > > local and in the impl JAR. I'd rather not duplicate the logic since > whats > > being done is exactly what is needed. I was wondering if anyone had any > > concerns with making this an API class instead of an impl class? > > > > John > > >
