IMO I'd rather see the internal mechanism be able to evolve and make use of vetted improvements instead of remaining in the land of Guice of 5+ years ago. Newer Guice has more capabilities.
Dave On Nov 28, 2012 10:27 AM, "Jeff Black" <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps I am too old and have been in the consulting business too long, > but to change the internal DI facility -- which is working beautifully -- > merely for the sake of changing seems to be an unnecessary risk. > > > My two cents. > > Jeff > > > ________________________________ > From: Rene Gielen <[email protected]> > To: Struts Developers List <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:58 AM > Subject: Re: Plan for Struts 3 > > Konstantin, > > you make a valid point that JSR 330 by itself is no solution to our > problems with internal injection. As I tried to explain in another post > to this thread, we have to differentiate between internal injection and > injection abstraction towards user side. > > As for how to evolve internal injection, integrating Guice would be the > option to go. Your points about the limits of class bound annotations > are valid, and that is why we have to decide for a concrete DI > implementation rather than a standard (though it is nice if it > introduces a standard on it's back). This is why Guice would make sense, > since it would support our mechanism of offering configuration options > apart from classes, via property injection and binding configuration > done in struts.xml, so without the need for DI framework specific > configuration files besides our own config. > > - René > > Am 28.11.12 09:01, schrieb Konstantin Priblouda: > > Hi guys, > > > > JSR 330 is cool and shall be definitely supported - but you still > need fallback metadata mechanism. > > Drawback of annotatioj is that it is class bound, and thus you can > not have two of something without > > subclassing. Neither can you reconfigure classes coming as jar > dependency. > > > > Just EUR 0.02 from picocontainer developer. > > > > regadrs, > > > > ----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]---------------- > > JTec quality components: http://www.pribluda.de/projects/ > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Paul Benedict <[email protected]> > > To: Struts Developers List <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 8:31 AM > > Subject: Re: Plan for Struts 3 > > > > Well I know that XWork had its only dependency injection support, but now > > that Java has a standard dependency injection mechanism, we should > > definitely go with that. Also it keeps on getting developed with each new > > EE so it's something we should support as a first-class citizen. > > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Lukasz Lenart <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> 2012/11/28 Paul Benedict <[email protected]>: > >>> What about dropping XWork injection support for JSR 330 (Commons DI)? > >> > >> You mean what we have now and use Guice as an internal DI mechanism ? > >> > >> > >> Regards > >> -- > >> Łukasz > >> + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/ > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > -- > René Gielen > IT-Neering.net > Saarstrasse 100, 52062 Aachen, Germany > Tel: +49-(0)241-4010770 > Fax: +49-(0)241-4010771 > Cel: +49-(0)163-2844164 > http://twitter.com/rgielen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
