What's currently on your branch? I saw proxy.  Anything else?

John

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:46 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> if i open 3 tickets (convert, proxy, cdi source/filter) then push my branch
> does it work?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
> <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
>
> 2016-11-08 18:43 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:41 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2016-11-07 17:56 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid>:
> > >
> > > > yes the EAR case is a bit harder. Also OSGi is a bit tricky.
> > > >
> > > > In my javaconfig proposal I have moved this out into a SPI which is
> > > > pluggable.
> > > > The only requirement is that you can get the config for 'your
> > > application'
> > > > via ConfigProvider#getConfig().
> > > >
> > > > If this is internally done via a Map<ClassLoader, Config> or a
> > > > Map<ConfigExtension, Config> or via a ThreadLocal is totally up to
> the
> > > > implementation. For OSGi the ClassLoader might not be as good as in a
> > WAR
> > > > or EAR. The ThreadLocal might blow up in an EAR on various
> containers,
> > > etc.
> > > > I fear there is no one-fits-all solution. We might provide an impl
> > which
> > > > can be configured to use different strategies.
> > > >
> > > > The question is whether we like to make it depending on CDI or if it
> > > > should also work purely in SE.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I'd say this one is easy for deltaspike if we re-read the project
> > proposal
> > > (and BTW should be the same under EE ecosystem now, other choices don't
> > > make much sense now in particuar for the config which should be
> > > contextualized by something else than itself - ok off topic ;)).
> > >
> > > Concretely how do we move forward on these topics? I'm concerned to get
> > > converter method in @ConfigProperty, the @Source/@Filter detection and
> > > proxy support. Other mentionned features can be put on a backlog or
> > > forgotten I wouldn't cry.
> > >
> > >
> > That's actually why i was saying separate JIRA tickets.  Tackle the
> complex
> > needed stuff now, work on the more polish stuff later.
> >
> > Obviously, deltaspike should be focused on CDI runtimes.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Monday, 7 November 2016, 12:44, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > added @Source and @Filter as markers (was breaking applications
> > > > otherwise),
> > > > > pushed the basic plain proxying too. Only tested with OWB for now
> but
> > > > seems
> > > > > not bad.
> > > > >
> > > > > The storage change is more impacting cause of ear case which is not
> > > > > protable at all so wonder if we can do anything about it without
> > > breaking
> > > > > existing applications. Maybe we should just ensure we don't leak
> the
> > > > > classloader as key for now to not break anyone (we can leak if CDI
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > finish to start and the application is undeployed AFAIK).
> > > > >
> > > > > Adding the ConfigResolver as an instance in the CDI context (= a
> > bean)
> > > is
> > > > > still an option IMHO but can wait and is more an internal
> refactoring
> > > > than
> > > > > an API work.
> > > > >
> > > > > wdyt? What would be the next steps? JIRA for converter method,
> proxy
> > > > > feature and source/filter detection in CDI?
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy to also get some help on running it on other containers.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE
> Factory
> > > > > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > 2016-11-07 9:39 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > >>  In the spirit of sharing and trying to move forward I started a
> > > branch
> > > > on
> > > > >>  my github fork: https://github.com/rmannibucau/deltaspike/tree/
> > > > >>  fb/config-rework
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  For now it includes 1 ("easy") and 5 (pre 2 storage but will be
> > > > > part of
> > > > >>  the refactoring "2" normally since we'll not break this API).
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  About 5 there is the question of the detection. By type is enough
> > > > >>  technically but wonder if we should introduce @Source and @Filter
> > > just
> > > > as
> > > > >>  markers to ensure we don't also detect SPI sources and filters
> > which
> > > > > are
> > > > >>  likely CDI beans in a lot of apps.
> > > > >>  Feedback welcomed ^^ :).
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  Once done, next step will be to add 3 then try to do 2. If all is
> > > good
> > > > we
> > > > >>  can work on the jira tickets.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>  @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > >>  <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> > > > >>  <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > >>  <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > >>  <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | JavaEE Factory
> > > > >>  <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  2016-11-06 21:40 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg
> <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid
> > > >:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>  +1 for moving the Config out into an own module. It's the best
> we
> > > > > can do
> > > > >>>  for now. The JSR will likely take a bit to evolve and until then
> > we
> > > > can
> > > > > use
> > > > >>>  what we have in DeltaSpike. Just a bit cleaned up.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  LieGrue,
> > > > >>>  strub
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  PS: a single ticket is by far enough imo.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  > On Sunday, 6 November 2016, 21:28, John D. Ament
> > > > > <johndam...@apache.org>
> > > > >>>  wrote:
> > > > >>>  > > Some thoughts in line.
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 3:16 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > >>>  rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>  > wrote:
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>  Hi guys
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  sent it some times ago - ok, a long time ago now ;) - but
> > > > > will retry
> > > > >>>  with
> > > > >>>  >>  few more details now.
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  Goal: I'd like to rework a bit our configuration
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > How does this relate, if at all, to Mark's proposal for config
> > > > > on
> > > > >>>  geronimo?
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  Proposals (no particular order but numbered to let it be
> > > > > referenced):
> > > > >>>  >>  1. Add converter to @ConfigProperty (cdi lookup or fallback
> > > > > on
> > > > >>>  >>  newInstance() probably)
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > +1
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>  2. remove the map storage we have and replace it by
> > > > >>>  >>  2.a. a thread local during the boot ConfigResolver would use
> > > > >>>  >>  2.b. a config bean for the runtime (BeanProvider or
> > > > > CDI.current()
> > > > >>>  allow to
> > > > >>>  >>  get it easily)
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > +1000 I hate the static methods for users.
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>  3. add an interface/abstract class based configuration
> > > > > "à la
> > > > >>>  > owner"
> > > > >>>  >>  (probably reusing @ConfigProperty)
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > I've been thinking about this as well.  Sounds like a good fit
> > > > > for
> > > > >>>  partial
> > > > >>>  > bean.
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>  4. extract config in its own module to let it be reused more
> > > > > widely
> > > > >>>  without
> > > > >>>  >>  bringing all ds core
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > I like the idea.  But I think the real problem is defining
> what
> > is
> > > > > core
> > > > >>>  vs
> > > > >>>  > what is a module.  To me, core should be a lightweight
> > component.
> > > > > We've
> > > > >>>  > stuck some extra stuff in there that can be a pain sometimes.
> > May
> > > > > be
> > > > >>>  worth
> > > > >>>  > an entirely separate thread.
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>  5. support during bootstrap the detection of converters and
> > > > > sources
> > > > >>>  (not
> > > > >>>  >>  only propertyfile ones) and add them in the runtime config
> > > > > added in
> > > > >>>  2.b
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > Well, this kind of works today.  Using a property source
> > provider,
> > > > > I was
> > > > >>>  > able to create a archaius config source and have it discovered
> > > > > pretty
> > > > >>>  early
> > > > >>>  > on.
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  2. implies we don't use the config in extension
> > > > > constructor (which
> > > > >>>  > should
> > > > >>>  >>  be fine) and that we can cleanup the thread local after CDI
> > > > > startup
> > > > >>>  (here
> > > > >>>  >>  we can have few options to enforce this cleanup like using
> > > > >>>  >>  AfterDeploymentValidation by default + probably either some
> > > > > container
> > > > >>>  >>  dependent solutions or at least a
> > > > > ServletContextListener#context
> > > > >>>  Destroyed
> > > > >>>  >>  for the case deployment fails)
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  Excepted the usability (converter option, extraction in a
> > > > > dedicated
> > > > >>>  module)
> > > > >>>  >>  the goal is to not do any concurrence to CDI lookup mecanism
> > > > > and stay
> > > > >>>  100%
> > > > >>>  >>  aligned on it.
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  In term of usability the fact to be able to have a real CDI
> > > > > source
> > > > >>>  DTO for
> > > > >>>  >>  runtime and reuse default ones (system properties,
> properties
> > > > > in
> > > > >>>  classpath,
> > > > >>>  >>  etc..) for the extension itself (internal application
> > > > > configuration)
> > > > >>>  is a
> > > > >>>  >>  huge gain IMHO.
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  Wdyt? Any blocker?
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  > Would you be able to get the ideas into JIRA as a few
> different
> > > > > tickets?
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  This would likely lead to a 1.8.
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >>  Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >>>  >>  @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > >>>  >>  <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Blog
> > > > >>>  >>  <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > >>>  >>  https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > >>>  >>  LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > JavaEE Factory
> > > > >>>  >>  <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com>
> > > > >>>  >>
> > > > >>>  >
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to