[DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. txs and LieGrue, strub
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
Hello, I think we have to switch to GA. Because people think that Alpha is not production ready! So 1.0.0 GA will be the best! Thanks; --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 11:22:41 AM Subject: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. txs and LieGrue, strub
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
That's fine with me! But I'd rather not call it 1.0.0-GA but only 1.0.0. It's obvious that it's Generally Available now ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 8:43 AM Hello, I think we have to switch to GA. Because people think that Alpha is not production ready! So 1.0.0 GA will be the best! Thanks; --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 11:22:41 AM Subject: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. txs and LieGrue, strub
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
:) Ok, yeah --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 11:52:36 AM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 That's fine with me! But I'd rather not call it 1.0.0-GA but only 1.0.0. It's obvious that it's Generally Available now ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 8:43 AM Hello, I think we have to switch to GA. Because people think that Alpha is not production ready! So 1.0.0 GA will be the best! Thanks; --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 11:22:41 AM Subject: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. txs and LieGrue, strub
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
cool thanks! I'll commit a few pom changes and fix our ugly site today ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 9:43 AM FYI trying to get OWB-456 in today before tag
[jira] Commented: (OWB-459) upgrade to newer library versions
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-459?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12915702#action_12915702 ] Mark Struberg commented on OWB-459: --- I'll also upgrade a few plugins and move from the codehaus.mojo rat plugin to the official org.apache.rat:rat-maven-plugin:0.7 upgrade to newer library versions - Key: OWB-459 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-459 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Mark Struberg Assignee: Mark Struberg Fix For: 1.0.0-alpha-3 A few new lib versions are available in the meantime: * myfaces-2.0.2 * lots of geronimo-spec jars -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
the problem with OWB-444 is that it is pretty much work and changes a lot of internal things. Thus I'd like to postpone it for a 1.1.x release and now ship 1.0.0 because it's otherwise really stable. I'll create a 1.0.x maintenance branch while releasing 1.0.0 and move the trunk to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. If we find any important problems (blockers, mem-leaks and such things) in 1.0.0, then we'll fix it in the branch and ship it as 1.0.1 . All daily stuff and fixes will then be done in the 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT trunk. Any objections? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:38 AM hello, basically i would vote +1. however, as mentioned earlier it would be great if we finish OWB-444 before the release of v1. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de cool thanks! I'll commit a few pom changes and fix our ugly site today ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 9:43 AM FYI trying to get OWB-456 in today before tag
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
Any1 got some spare time to review our documentation? http://openwebbeans.apache.org/1.0.0-SNAPSHOT/documents/userguide.pdf I think a few things are pretty outdated already. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 11:02 AM i know - that was the reason why i wrote: basically i would vote +1. +1 for the maintenance branch. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de the problem with OWB-444 is that it is pretty much work and changes a lot of internal things. Thus I'd like to postpone it for a 1.1.x release and now ship 1.0.0 because it's otherwise really stable. I'll create a 1.0.x maintenance branch while releasing 1.0.0 and move the trunk to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. If we find any important problems (blockers, mem-leaks and such things) in 1.0.0, then we'll fix it in the branch and ship it as 1.0.1 . All daily stuff and fixes will then be done in the 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT trunk. Any objections? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:38 AM hello, basically i would vote +1. however, as mentioned earlier it would be great if we finish OWB-444 before the release of v1. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de cool thanks! I'll commit a few pom changes and fix our ugly site today ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 9:43 AM FYI trying to get OWB-456 in today before tag
[jira] Resolved: (OWB-459) upgrade to newer library versions
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-459?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Struberg resolved OWB-459. --- Fix Version/s: 1.0.0-GA (was: 1.0.0-alpha-3) Resolution: Fixed upgrade to newer library versions - Key: OWB-459 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-459 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Mark Struberg Assignee: Mark Struberg Fix For: 1.0.0-GA A few new lib versions are available in the meantime: * myfaces-2.0.2 * lots of geronimo-spec jars -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
i suggest to move the documentation to the confluence wiki. it's easier for the community to contribute to the documentation. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de Any1 got some spare time to review our documentation? http://openwebbeans.apache.org/1.0.0-SNAPSHOT/documents/userguide.pdf I think a few things are pretty outdated already. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 11:02 AM i know - that was the reason why i wrote: basically i would vote +1. +1 for the maintenance branch. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de the problem with OWB-444 is that it is pretty much work and changes a lot of internal things. Thus I'd like to postpone it for a 1.1.x release and now ship 1.0.0 because it's otherwise really stable. I'll create a 1.0.x maintenance branch while releasing 1.0.0 and move the trunk to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. If we find any important problems (blockers, mem-leaks and such things) in 1.0.0, then we'll fix it in the branch and ship it as 1.0.1 . All daily stuff and fixes will then be done in the 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT trunk. Any objections? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:38 AM hello, basically i would vote +1. however, as mentioned earlier it would be great if we finish OWB-444 before the release of v1. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de cool thanks! I'll commit a few pom changes and fix our ugly site today ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 9:43 AM FYI trying to get OWB-456 in today before tag
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
OWB Wiki is enabled at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OWB/Index --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 3:10:07 PM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 +1 Gurkan, can you setup confluence and write a small howto? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 12:06 PM i suggest to move the documentation to the confluence wiki. it's easier for the community to contribute to the documentation. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de Any1 got some spare time to review our documentation? http://openwebbeans.apache.org/1.0.0-SNAPSHOT/documents/userguide.pdf I think a few things are pretty outdated already. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 11:02 AM i know - that was the reason why i wrote: basically i would vote +1. +1 for the maintenance branch. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de the problem with OWB-444 is that it is pretty much work and changes a lot of internal things. Thus I'd like to postpone it for a 1.1.x release and now ship 1.0.0 because it's otherwise really stable. I'll create a 1.0.x maintenance branch while releasing 1.0.0 and move the trunk to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. If we find any important problems (blockers, mem-leaks and such things) in 1.0.0, then we'll fix it in the branch and ship it as 1.0.1 . All daily stuff and fixes will then be done in the 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT trunk. Any objections? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 10:38 AM hello, basically i would vote +1. however, as mentioned earlier it would be great if we finish OWB-444 before the release of v1. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de cool thanks! I'll commit a few pom changes and fix our ugly site today ;) LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 9:43 AM FYI trying to get OWB-456 in today before tag
[cwiki] owb-committers
@committers: please post your confluence user-names and i'll add them to the committers-group. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com Very cool! Thanks; --Gurkan - Original Message From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 3:43:40 PM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 i've added a basic menu as well as an initial page for the documentation [1] regards, gerhard [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OWB/Documentation http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/9/28 Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com OWB Wiki is enabled at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OWB/Index --Gurkan - Original Message From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 28, 2010 3:10:07 PM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 +1 Gurkan, can you setup confluence and write a small howto? txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 12:06 PM i suggest to move the documentation to the confluence wiki. it's easier for the community to contribute to the documentation. regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
Re: [cwiki] owb-committers
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Gerhard gerhard.petra...@gmail.com wrote: @committers: please post your confluence user-names and i'll add them to the committers-group. Thanks for this -- I just registered with cove...@apache.org as username.
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:22 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote: Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. Before 1.0, should we update the name of the openwebbeans/ subdirectories and/or the maven output jars for ejb/openejb? webbeans-ejb produces webbeans-ejb-common.jar (which does not depend on openejb) webbeans-openejb produces webbeans-ejb.jar (which depends on openejb) Just my pet peeve/confusion, if they were just ejb-common/ejb-common and ejb-openejb/ejb-openejb (or openejb/openejb) it would be less confusing. Of course I have no idea of the conventions in this area, the packaging ramifications, or am able to actually do the work :) -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
[jira] Resolved: (OWB-460) fix owb-openejb and owb-ejb artifactIds
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-460?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Struberg resolved OWB-460. --- Resolution: Fixed artifactIds are now corresponding to the module name fix owb-openejb and owb-ejb artifactIds --- Key: OWB-460 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-460 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Mark Struberg Assignee: Mark Struberg Fix For: 1.0.0-GA as catched by Eric: Before 1.0, should we update the name of the openwebbeans/ subdirectories and/or the maven output jars for ejb/openejb? webbeans-ejb produces webbeans-ejb-common.jar (which does not depend on openejb) webbeans-openejb produces webbeans-ejb.jar (which depends on openejb) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3
SNAPSHOT + site deploy went well. The new site will show up after getting synced in a few hours. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote: From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 2:06 PM oki changed this now, will commit it soon and then I'll start a snapshot deploy + site deploy. LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote: From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 2:03 PM Hah, yes definitely. Completely confusing historical artifact ;) txs 4 the catch, could you change this please? LieGrue, strub --- On Tue, 9/28/10, Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote: From: Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0-alpha-3 To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 1:56 PM On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:22 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote: Hi folks! We had a few very important changes in the last few weeks *) mem leak fix *) upgrade to a few newer lib versions *) lazy SessionContext creation *) site fix (currently in progress locally) *) PrePassivate, PostActivate, and AroundTimeout support *) lots of EJB improvements I'd like to run the release tasks for 1.0.0-alpha-3 tomorrow, WDYT? If you like to complete/test some feature which you think must go into this release, then please ping me. Before 1.0, should we update the name of the openwebbeans/ subdirectories and/or the maven output jars for ejb/openejb? webbeans-ejb produces webbeans-ejb-common.jar (which does not depend on openejb) webbeans-openejb produces webbeans-ejb.jar (which depends on openejb) Just my pet peeve/confusion, if they were just ejb-common/ejb-common and ejb-openejb/ejb-openejb (or openejb/openejb) it would be less confusing. Of course I have no idea of the conventions in this area, the packaging ramifications, or am able to actually do the work :) -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
[jira] Created: (OWB-461) source code quality
source code quality --- Key: OWB-461 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-461 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Affects Versions: 1.0.0-GA Reporter: Gerhard Petracek Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu after a lot of previous refactorings the code base needs a cleanup. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Created: (OWB-462) Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember()
Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember() - Key: OWB-462 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-462 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Task Components: Core Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Jakob Korherr Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu We needed a method to compare qualifiers for MyFaces CODI and stumbled upon AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember(). However this method is really messy, because it uses the String representation of an annotation to compare it and thus fails in various cases (e.g. when using annotation instances which implement toString() differently or by using array values in the qualifier). Furthermore it does not detect @Nonbinding fields correctly, if there is more than one annotation on the annotation-method. Also it's kinda weird that the method takes the Annotation-Class as an extra parameter, but it could just get it from one of the Annotation instances. I checked all usages and found out that this argument can be dropped. In addition I think it's better to rename the method to isQualifierEqual() - the usage is just a lot clearer. I implemented a custom solution for MyFaces CODI and I think it should also be applied here. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Updated: (OWB-462) Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember()
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-462?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jakob Korherr updated OWB-462: -- Attachment: OWB-462.patch The patch contains the refactored code and some test cases. Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember() - Key: OWB-462 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-462 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Task Components: Core Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Jakob Korherr Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu Attachments: OWB-462.patch We needed a method to compare qualifiers for MyFaces CODI and stumbled upon AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember(). However this method is really messy, because it uses the String representation of an annotation to compare it and thus fails in various cases (e.g. when using annotation instances which implement toString() differently or by using array values in the qualifier). Furthermore it does not detect @Nonbinding fields correctly, if there is more than one annotation on the annotation-method. Also it's kinda weird that the method takes the Annotation-Class as an extra parameter, but it could just get it from one of the Annotation instances. I checked all usages and found out that this argument can be dropped. In addition I think it's better to rename the method to isQualifierEqual() - the usage is just a lot clearer. I implemented a custom solution for MyFaces CODI and I think it should also be applied here. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Resolved: (OWB-463) EjbDefinitionUtility.defineEjbBeanProxy() should be able to create proxies for no-interface local beans
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-463?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Eric Covener resolved OWB-463. -- Resolution: Fixed EjbDefinitionUtility.defineEjbBeanProxy() should be able to create proxies for no-interface local beans --- Key: OWB-463 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-463 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Improvement Components: Java EE Integration Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Eric Covener Assignee: Eric Covener Fix For: 1.0.0-alpha-3 Original Estimate: 1h Remaining Estimate: 1h Sometimes callers of EjbDefinitionUtility.defineEjbBeanProxy() will have to pass the local bean class, when @LocalBean is the only valid local business interface. But, we can't pass the bean class to the proxyFactory.setInterfaces() as this causes an exeption in javassist since it's not really an interface that can be implemented. On my stack, I see Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: by java.lang.IncompatibleClassChangeError: foo.classWithLocalBeanView at javassist.util.proxy.ProxyFactory.createClass3(ProxyFactory.java:509) at javassist.util.proxy.ProxyFactory.createClass2(ProxyFactory.java:486) at javassist.util.proxy.ProxyFactory.createClass1(ProxyFactory.java:422) at javassist.util.proxy.ProxyFactory.createClass(ProxyFactory.java:394) at org.apache.webbeans.util.SecurityUtil$PrivilegedActionForProxyFactory.run(SecurityUtil.java:301) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(AccessController.java:202) at org.apache.webbeans.util.SecurityUtil.doPrivilegedCreateClass(SecurityUtil.java:184) at org.apache.webbeans.proxy.JavassistProxyFactory.defineEjbBeanProxyClass(JavassistProxyFactory.java:149) at org.apache.webbeans.ejb.common.util.EjbDefinitionUtility.defineEjbBeanProxy(EjbDefinitionUtility.java:73) Simply calling proxyFactory.setSuperClass() seems sufficient and makes sense. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (OWB-462) Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember()
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-462?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12916036#action_12916036 ] Gurkan Erdogdu commented on OWB-462: thanks Jakob, I will look your patch. Refactor AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember() - Key: OWB-462 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-462 Project: OpenWebBeans Issue Type: Task Components: Core Affects Versions: 1.0.0-alpha-2 Reporter: Jakob Korherr Assignee: Gurkan Erdogdu Attachments: OWB-462.patch We needed a method to compare qualifiers for MyFaces CODI and stumbled upon AnnotationUtil.hasAnnotationMember(). However this method is really messy, because it uses the String representation of an annotation to compare it and thus fails in various cases (e.g. when using annotation instances which implement toString() differently or by using array values in the qualifier). Furthermore it does not detect @Nonbinding fields correctly, if there is more than one annotation on the annotation-method. Also it's kinda weird that the method takes the Annotation-Class as an extra parameter, but it could just get it from one of the Annotation instances. I checked all usages and found out that this argument can be dropped. In addition I think it's better to rename the method to isQualifierEqual() - the usage is just a lot clearer. I implemented a custom solution for MyFaces CODI and I think it should also be applied here. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
