I do agree that with the term 'priority' 1 (or 0) is the 'most important one'.
And that is one of the reasons I don't really like it. We really need an open scale. It must always be possible to add some 'even more important' configuration on top. Thus, the higher the number, the more important it is (and override less important ConfigSources). LieGrue, strub > On Sunday, 28 December 2014, 17:03, Romain Manni-Bucau > <[email protected]> wrote: > > @Mark you proved it is 1-1 with your example. If we use number both > ways have the same issue. It is common to use string as well and > tolerate before("application"), after("other source") > etc...but I > guess having numbers to start is good enough. Then I prefer the most > prioritized is 0 but since we have @Priority we should stick to it IMO > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > 2014-12-28 16:32 GMT+01:00 Anatole Tresch <[email protected]>: >> Also confusing sometimes is that with overrriding higher priority sources >> are added later, since they override others... >> >> ... >> >> Mark Struberg <[email protected]> schrieb am Sun Dec 28 2014 at > 16:23:20: >> >>> Anatole, you've never heard "what's your no 1 priority > right now?" >>> >>> priority is the order in which things get done. >>> prio 1 : do it now >>> prio 2 : do it after 1 >>> prio 3 : do it after 2 >>> etc >>> >>> but how do you add something IN FRONT? Something which is even higher > prio >>> than 1? >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't care that much about how we call it. But if we keep magic > numbers >>> than I really do care that higher values mean 'more important'. >>> >>> If you like 'priority' better than 'ordinal' we could > also go with the >>> @Priority annotation. >>> >>> >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > On Sunday, 28 December 2014, 16:15, Anatole Tresch > <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > For less numeric values means less priority as well... >>> > >>> > Mark Struberg <[email protected]> schrieb am Sun Dec 28 2014 > at >>> 15:40:09: >>> > >>> >> We should get a common understanding which of those 2 > different >>> approaches >>> >> we should take. >>> >> My main concern is that it should be clear as glass for the > user what >>> he >>> >> gets. >>> >> >>> >> What has a higher priority? 1, 2, or 3 ? >>> >> Imo the highes priority is always 1. But then it's really > hard to add a >>> >> more important priority. >>> >> >>> >> We've discussed this to some extent in OpenWebBeans where > I first >>> >> implemented this mechanism in 2009 (see PropertyLoader). And > back then >>> we >>> >> decided to not use 'priority' but 'ordinal'. > Because the >>> > higher the ordinal >>> >> (math) the more important something is. >>> >> That way it is really easy to add a ConfigSource which is > 'even more >>> >> important' and thus tweak the effective configuration. >>> >> >>> >> What do others think about those 2 approaches? >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> LieGrue, >>> >> strub >>> >> >>> > >>> >
