>>>> 1) finding which jar's to scan (haven't checked this but using the service 
>>>> declaration in META-INF might be enough)
>>> 
>>> I think it should
>>> 
>>>> 2) when scanning the jar knowing which classes in the jar's that looks 
>>>> like compliant CDI beans really aren't beans.
>>> 
>>> I think this is simple. If it has beans.xml, as normal. If it doesn't look 
>>> for Solder annotations and register those beans...
>> 
>> that sounds like a plan.
>> 
>> and just to be sure - you mean beans.xml as normal + scan solder annotations 
>> and if no beans.ml and just service declaration in manifest.mf only scan 
>> solder annotations ?
> 
> Yes. For now just solder, but if any other such libs come up consider adding 
> those?

Not unless there is a need.

> For JBoss stuff, it will be Solder though. This will mean that people have 
> the option of using CDI annotations OR Solder annotations to define their 
> beans, which I think should mean that 90% of extensions can be done 
> declaratively if authors try hard (this is a good incentive to do just that). 
> We will need to consider a design-beans.xml or something for the remaining 
> beans I think - perhaps for now based on seam config?

That's what we discussed yes - but would be good to have some example 
definition of these we could use/explore.

> Anyway, that can't go in the spec until there is an xml dialect there...

yes - thus focusing on Solder annotations and eventually seamconfg xml support 
sounds like the best plan to me.

>> and this will also mean that if an archive actually contains "normal" CDI 
>> beans they would not be picked up. Correct?
> 
> An archive without beans.xml?

yes, one that only has the manifest-mf service to say "enable Solder scanning"


>>>>> I really don't think that forcing some xml file on extension developers 
>>>>> is very clever - either they would have to use this as the canonical 
>>>>> source of info in which case we're back to programming in XML and it 
>>>>> doesn't look good when people ask for examples of using CDI extensions, 
>>>>> or we have to keep this stuff in sync.
>>>> 
>>>> Since the annotations aren't descriptive enough we'll need to come up with 
>>>> something ;)
>>> 
>>> I think we need to revisit why the annotations aren't descriptive enough...
>> 
>> Last time it was that the beans simply didn't have annotations or any 
>> metadata when registered programmatically.
> 
> Right, as above, I hope Solder + CDI can cover 90% of cases...

Well, its the darnest 10% that is tricky....i.e. noticing that UserTransaction, 
PersistenceContext and any other new "thing" will have to be somehow registered 
as "available". If not, you get annoying warnings.

/max

> 
>> 
>> /max
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> /max
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 24 Mar 2011, at 20:56, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Talking with Seam/CDI tooling team at EclipseCon and we are still in the 
>>>>>> dark on how tooling are supposed to identify CDI extensions that are 
>>>>>> registered programmatically and often does not have a beans.xml to 
>>>>>> "mark" them.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Today we do it by simply scanning jars with *weld*.jar naming pattern 
>>>>>> (very brittle and not good for 3rd party extensions).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Furthermore we also have a list of classes to include/exclude since some 
>>>>>> components in these jars aren't CDI compliant.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> How do we go about identifying these things ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The idea discussed with Dan/Pete on this topic previously were to add a 
>>>>>> design-beans.xml
>>>>>> and use that as a marker + list the classes we should load/configure as 
>>>>>> possible injection/navigation candidates in the tooling.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was hoping this were settled before Seam 3 GA but it seem to fallen 
>>>>>> through the cracks ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Something I missed ? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> /max
>>>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> seam-dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> /max
>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> /max
>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

/max
http://about.me/maxandersen




_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

Reply via email to