Ok, I read through your test code, so if you are saying that servlet a gets
same beanmanager as servlet b then yeah thats bad.


On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:44 AM, John Sarman <[email protected]> wrote:

> I was looking at your bug, but in the case you specified where the cached
> BeanManager is passed, seems to be the correct behavior because the
> CdiConfiguration is ApplicationScoped.  The CDI class states this:
> /**
>      * Get the CDI BeanManager for the current context
>      *
>      * @return
>      */
>     public abstract BeanManager getBeanManager();
>
> So the cached BeanManager passed back is because it is accessed in an
> ApplicationScoped class.   ApplicationScoped != Wickets Application scope.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Emond Papegaaij <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You are right, InitialContext.lookup was returning null. I've fixed it by
>> falling
>> back to CDI.current().getBeanManager() in that case. The workaround is
>> needed because of a very nasty bug in de Wildfly-Weld integration:
>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-2481
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Emond
>>
>> On Monday 11 November 2013 08:18:20 John Sarman wrote:
>> > As far as the Test failing, I think the workaround code to use jndi
>> first
>> > may have caused the test to fail.  So far it seems that all the request
>> > pull 50 is not in the 6 branch.
>> > What forced the need for the workaround?
>> >
>> > John
>> >
>> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:00 AM, John Sarman
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > It is not a forced requirement, just an option for full cdi injection.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Emond Papegaaij <
>> > >
>> > > [email protected]> wrote:
>> > >> Hi John,
>> > >>
>> > >> I've just merged the pull request in the wicket-6.x branch (still
>> under
>> > >> experimental). The version still is 0.2-SNAPSHOT, as the versions are
>> > >> automatically increased on release. The reason I've merged the pull
>> > >> request is to give us all a common baseline to discuss. Could you
>> please
>> > >> verify I did not break anything merging it? All testcases but one
>> pass.
>> > >> The
>> > >> failing testcase (CdiConfigurationTest.testMultiAppLoad) tries to
>> access
>> > >> the
>> > >> BeanManager from an unmanaged thread, resulting in an NPE.
>> > >>
>> > >> I've already noticed one aspect I do not like: the requirement to
>> > >> annotate
>> > >> your app with @WicketApp. With a Producer method, it should be
>> possible
>> > >> to use the actual application names, without the requirement to
>> duplicate
>> > >> them on your application class.
>> > >>
>> > >> Best regards,
>> > >> Emond
>> > >>
>> > >> On Sunday 10 November 2013 16:44:28 John Sarman wrote:
>> > >> > Edmond,
>> > >> > On July, I worked vigorously to get to the 0.3 snapshot, which was
>> what
>> > >>
>> > >> I
>> > >>
>> > >> > consider the first beta ready version of the move to cdi1.1.  The
>> 0.1
>> > >>
>> > >> and
>> > >>
>> > >> > 0.2 snapshot was 0.1, getting it to work and learning how to
>> request
>> > >>
>> > >> pull
>> > >>
>> > >> > requests.  0.2 was adding some slight fixes and testing.  After
>> that
>> I
>> > >> > realized that I was treating the @ApplicationScoped as same
>> scope that
>> > >> > ThreadContext gives to a Wicket App.  That is entirely wrong.  So
>> the
>> > >> > previous version only properly supports at most 1 Wicket app, the
>> > >>
>> > >> second
>> > >>
>> > >> > could override the Configuration of the first (not acceptable).  In
>> my
>> > >>
>> > >> 0.3
>> > >>
>> > >> > version, I added the code to prevent that, by using the Wicket app
>> key
>> > >> > generated as the key to the configuration properties for an app.
>> This
>> > >> > allows for multiple Wicket apps to be deployed in a Servlet.
>> However,
>> > >>
>> > >> for
>> > >>
>> > >> > whatever reason, that checkin could not properly merge into the 7
>> > >>
>> > >> branch.
>> > >>
>> > >> >  I have to remedy this even if I just have to copy paste the code,
>> to
>> > >>
>> > >> make
>> > >>
>> > >> > git happy ( I blame myself, not Git).  In the meantime, I recommend
>> > >>
>> > >> looking
>> > >>
>> > >> > at my latest (albeit broken) pull request
>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/50 and port that version. It
>> adds
>> > >> > thorough testing, fixes the multiple deploy issue, reintroduces the
>> > >> > auto
>> > >> > Conversation, and extends the ConversationalComponent by
>> introducing
>> > >>
>> > >> the
>> > >>
>> > >> > @Conversational, which by default works the same as the Cdi-1.0
>> > >> > ConverationalComponent, but also allows the propagation and
>> auto
>> > >>
>> > >> feature to
>> > >>
>> > >> > be modified for an Object that uses the annotation, without
>> affecting
>> > >>
>> > >> the
>> > >>
>> > >> > global defaults set during Configuration.  The 0.3 also introduces
>> the
>> > >> > CdiWicketFilter.  The CdiWicketFilter allows the configuration
>> settings
>> > >>
>> > >> to
>> > >>
>> > >> > be managed in web.xml.  It also instantiates the WicketApplication
>> > >> > using
>> > >> > Cdi so that the Application is injected before the init() method.
>> The
>>
>
>

Reply via email to