Hi!
This is related to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-123
We had this discussion on the list and I already got lots of questions why we
have those 'duplicated functions'.
In fact I had to explain the differences a few times already thus I decided to
drop the start() and
hi mark,
that means you have to write 4 lines in several (for sure not all) cases,
but you can do the same with 2 lines (with the convenience methods).
if there was confusion about the previous convenience methods (i can't see
it in the archive), it's just a matter of documentation (= one line of
()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
hi mark,
that means you have to write 4 lines in several (for sure not all)
cases,
but you can do the same with 2 lines (with the convenience methods).
if there was confusion about the previous convenience methods (i can't see
it in the archive), it's just
ticket.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
hi mark,
that means you have
19, 2012 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
I'm strongly in favour of the slightly more verbose API that Mark proposes
where contexts are started/stopped separately from booting the container. For
me, this is a semantically different operation (starting CDI
for it after the
container.shutdown();
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
hi
PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
hi mark,
3 lines would mean that we agree on the merged shutdown and that isn't
what
we have right now.
regards,
gerhard
2012/3/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com
I'm strongly in favour of the slightly more verbose API
/openwebbeans.properties
- Original Message -
From: Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
What about if I wanted to stop
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
You can't restart the application context in Weld.
I'll have to think on what this means for the API you propose, but my first
instinct is to say that we
@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
What about if I wanted to stop the contexts and then start them again,
without
restarting the container? This is definitely useful
@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
What about if I wanted to stop the contexts and then start them again,
without
restarting the container? This is definitely useful in tests
@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs
stop()/shutdown()
hi mark,
3 lines would mean that we agree on the merged shutdown
and that
isn't
what
we have right now.
regards,
gerhard
2012/3/19 Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org; Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
Personally, I think this is a safe API to go with for now, and we can always
explore a simplified API down the line...
On 19
- Original Message -
From: Pete Muir pm...@redhat.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org; Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
Personally, I think this is a safe API to go
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
You can't restart the application context in Weld.
I'll have to think on what this means for the API you propose, but
my first
instinct is to say that we should offer any global start/stop context
APIs at
all, but require users
-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
i'm still ok with B) (as it is right now), if cdi 1.1 will support
it
(for now we could document the use-cases which aren't supported).
however, since
no reason to drop the whole feature!
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
i'm still ok
3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
You can't restart the application context in Weld.
I'll have to think on what this means for the API you
propose, but
my first
instinct is to say that we should offer any global
start/stop context
APIs at
all
no reason to drop the whole feature!
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
i'm
: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
i'm still ok with B) (as it is right now), if cdi 1.1 will support
it
(for now we could document the use-cases which aren't supported).
however, since the current implementation of #stopContexts
: Re: [DISCUSS] start()/boot() vs stop()/shutdown()
i'm still ok with B) (as it is right now), if cdi 1.1 will support
it
(for now we could document the use-cases which aren't supported).
however, since the current implementation of #stopContexts doesn't
work
as
expected (out
21 matches
Mail list logo
