Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] XBean 4.0
And Thank You for the vote!! -- David Blevins http://twitter.com/dblevins http://www.tomitribe.com On Aug 25, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Counting votes it seems it passed: > > +1s: Alan D Cabrera, David Blevins, Romain Manni-Bucau > +0: Jean-Baptiste Onofré, Mark Struberg > -1: no > > thank you all for your votes. > > PS: ones having identified some issues would be welcomed to at least > open a jira explaining it and potentially proposing a fix if you > already have an idea to not forget them for 4.1 > > I'll publish binaries tonight. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2014-08-25 17:08 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau : >> @David: it was filtering java.lang.Object since it was created, java.* >> filter just extend this logic since it will never works (excepted if >> you bring java.* in your app which is unlikely. That said method is >> protected to be able to override it. >> >> >> In all case (I think I mentionned it several times) 4.x x > 0 will >> make it more usable (OSGi, this if you think it is bad etc...). Main >> purpose was to get a first release fixing linking time and respecting >> the constructor contract >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> Twitter: @rmannibucau >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >> >> >> 2014-08-25 16:12 GMT+02:00 David Blevins : >>> On Aug 20, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>> wrote: >>> The main changes are: >>> [...] skip java.* classes since we'll not get their bytecode for sure (protected method if needed) >>> >>> I'm not a fan of hard coding filtering inside the AnnotationFinder itself, >>> so +1 under the condition that we remain open to revising this in a future >>> release. >>> >>> >>> -David >>>
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] XBean 4.0
On Aug 25, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > PS: ones having identified some issues would be welcomed to at least > open a jira explaining it and potentially proposing a fix if you > already have an idea to not forget them for 4.1 Nicely phrased. And +1 on the welcome nudges. -David
[RESULT] [VOTE] XBean 4.0
Counting votes it seems it passed: +1s: Alan D Cabrera, David Blevins, Romain Manni-Bucau +0: Jean-Baptiste Onofré, Mark Struberg -1: no thank you all for your votes. PS: ones having identified some issues would be welcomed to at least open a jira explaining it and potentially proposing a fix if you already have an idea to not forget them for 4.1 I'll publish binaries tonight. Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2014-08-25 17:08 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau : > @David: it was filtering java.lang.Object since it was created, java.* > filter just extend this logic since it will never works (excepted if > you bring java.* in your app which is unlikely. That said method is > protected to be able to override it. > > > In all case (I think I mentionned it several times) 4.x x > 0 will > make it more usable (OSGi, this if you think it is bad etc...). Main > purpose was to get a first release fixing linking time and respecting > the constructor contract > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2014-08-25 16:12 GMT+02:00 David Blevins : >> On Aug 20, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> wrote: >> >>> The main changes are: >> [...] >>> skip java.* classes since we'll not get their bytecode for sure >>> (protected method if needed) >> >> I'm not a fan of hard coding filtering inside the AnnotationFinder itself, >> so +1 under the condition that we remain open to revising this in a future >> release. >> >> >> -David >>
Re: [VOTE] XBean 4.0
@David: it was filtering java.lang.Object since it was created, java.* filter just extend this logic since it will never works (excepted if you bring java.* in your app which is unlikely. That said method is protected to be able to override it. In all case (I think I mentionned it several times) 4.x x > 0 will make it more usable (OSGi, this if you think it is bad etc...). Main purpose was to get a first release fixing linking time and respecting the constructor contract Romain Manni-Bucau Twitter: @rmannibucau Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau 2014-08-25 16:12 GMT+02:00 David Blevins : > On Aug 20, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > wrote: > >> The main changes are: > [...] >> skip java.* classes since we'll not get their bytecode for sure >> (protected method if needed) > > I'm not a fan of hard coding filtering inside the AnnotationFinder itself, so > +1 under the condition that we remain open to revising this in a future > release. > > > -David >
Re: [VOTE] XBean 4.0
On Aug 20, 2014, at 10:23 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > The main changes are: [...] > skip java.* classes since we'll not get their bytecode for sure > (protected method if needed) I'm not a fan of hard coding filtering inside the AnnotationFinder itself, so +1 under the condition that we remain open to revising this in a future release. -David
