date:20231011

[Jenkins] Sling » Modules » sling-org-apache-sling-starter » master #1071 is FIXED

2023-10-11 Thread Apache Jenkins Server

Please see 
https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Sling/job/modules/job/sling-org-apache-sling-starter/job/master/1071/
 for details.

No further emails will be sent until the status of the build is changed.

[jira] [Commented] (SLING-12088) Update to Felix HTTP 5.x

2023-10-11 Thread Carsten Ziegeler (Jira)



[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-12088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17774330#comment-17774330
 ] 

Carsten Ziegeler commented on SLING-12088:
--

Fixed the HC servlert in 
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-starter/commit/5e559dfad84c3854032d292f105c65633afcb5e2

> Update to Felix HTTP 5.x
> 
>
> Key: SLING-12088
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-12088
> Project: Sling
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: Starter
>Reporter: Robert Munteanu
>Assignee: Robert Munteanu
>Priority: Major
>  Labels: Sling-13-Release-Notes
> Fix For: Starter 13
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Re: [PR] SLING-12038 add support for reified OSGi config annotations as test parameters [sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock]

2023-10-11 Thread via GitHub

adamcin commented on PR #31:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock/pull/31#issuecomment-1758809026

> 2. but it think it's very important that this new way of defining OSGi
configurations also works together with the current approach of OSGi mock using
registerInjectActivateService & co. so it should be possible to define a
configuration using the new annotations, and than creating the osgi component
instance using registerInjectActivateService without explicitly passing the
config data as argument. looking at the unit tests i think this is possible,
but only if using the @UpdateConfig annotation, not the @ApplyConfig
annotation, and not using the config annotation class itself as annotation?
would be good to flesh this out in detail in the documentation/examples.

The effects of `@UpdateConfig` are fully reflected in the service component
created by `registerInjectActivateService`. Injected config parameters
(reflected annotations and values constructed from `@ConfigType`
~~`@ApplyConfig`~~ annotations) don't currently have a way to be fed to
`registerInjectActivateService`, but I think it can be done.

> 3. what i do not like about the current registerInjectActivateService
approach and passing in configuration data is that you have to remember the
actual configuration property names and duplicate them as strings in the
testing code. that's ugly as there is nice typed annotation class at hand. i
would really love to combine registerInjectActivateService with the annotation
approach of using the OSGi config annotation directly as annotation of the test
class (but without having to inject the configuration than manually!).

I think this can also be done elegantly if I add an `@AutoConfig` annotation
that just takes a `Class value()` for inferring a component pid. When it is
present, any other annotations that are valid component property types are
converted to maps and merged into a single dictionary to update the config for
the component pid before each test execution.

> i'm not so fond of having to place and explicit
@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) to the annotation class, though - changing
the production code only for unit test purposes is always a red flag for me.

I had to convince myself to get over the same kind of resistance to it. But
it is an unavoidable necessity if we want to use the config types as
annotations, unless we want to get into the business of rewriting bytecode. I
haven't been able to come up with any reason why using runtime retention for
config annotations would be unsafe or insecure, or have any other kind of
observable effect on the code that actually goes to production.

--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@sling.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] SLING-12038 add support for reified OSGi config annotations as test parameters [sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock]

2023-10-11 Thread via GitHub



sonarcloud[bot] commented on PR #31:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock/pull/31#issuecomment-1758764292

   Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!  [![Quality Gate 
passed](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/QualityGateBadge/passed-16px.png
 'Quality Gate 
passed')](https://sonarcloud.io/dashboard?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31)
   
   
[![Bug](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/common/bug-16px.png
 
'Bug')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=BUG)
 
[![A](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/RatingBadge/A-16px.png
 
'A')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=BUG)
 [0 
Bugs](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=BUG)
  
   
[![Vulnerability](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/common/vulnerability-16px.png
 
'Vulnerability')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=VULNERABILITY)
 
[![A](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/RatingBadge/A-16px.png
 
'A')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=VULNERABILITY)
 [0 
Vulnerabilities](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=VULNERABILITY)
  
   [![Security 
Hotspot](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/common/security_hotspot-16px.png
 'Security 
Hotspot')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT)
 
[![A](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/RatingBadge/A-16px.png
 
'A')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT)
 [0 Security 
Hotspots](https://sonarcloud.io/project/security_hotspots?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=SECURITY_HOTSPOT)
  
   [![Code 
Smell](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/common/code_smell-16px.png
 'Code 
Smell')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=CODE_SMELL)
 
[![A](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/RatingBadge/A-16px.png
 
'A')](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=CODE_SMELL)
 [6 Code 
Smells](https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=false=CODE_SMELL)
   
   
[![99.8%](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/CoverageChart/90-16px.png
 
'99.8%')](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=new_coverage=list)
 [99.8% 
Coverage](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=new_coverage=list)
  
   
[![0.0%](https://sonarsource.github.io/sonarcloud-github-static-resources/v2/checks/Duplications/3-16px.png
 
'0.0%')](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=new_duplicated_lines_density=list)
 [0.0% 
Duplication](https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=apache_sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock=31=new_duplicated_lines_density=list)
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@sling.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [PR] SLING-12038 add support for reified OSGi config annotations as test parameters [sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock]

2023-10-11 Thread via GitHub

adamcin commented on PR #31:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-testing-osgi-mock/pull/31#issuecomment-1758743454

> 1. you propose to use this new features as lightweight alternative to the
SCR metadata-based approach, making it easy to construct OSGI annotations
filled with the configured data in the testing code. i'm worrying a bit about
the approach to directly instantiate the OSGi component which effectively
ignores all SCR annotations. this is fine for simple services as in your
example, but if more stuff is used o.g. references to other services with
complex reference mappings it will be left to the test developer to inject all
of this properly, and it's easy to overlook something. still, if there is a
need for such a simple approach and the test developer knows what he is doing,
that's fine. a warning should be put for that in the documentation around the
limitations of this approach.

@stefanseifert I removed the javadoc text that you are referencing because
of the confusion. The words "lightweight alternative" probably don't make any
sense with how this feature has evolved.

The initial and primary purpose for this extension is to support unit
testing of service component constructors and activation methods with pure java
types with the same granularity that other component methods can currently be
tested. The secondary purposes that have evolved during development are to
support verifying the expected mapping between config property names and
annotation attributes, and to make it clearer when defining OSGi configurations
for use in `registerInjectActivateService`.

--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

65 matches

Mail list logo