I've raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-2064 for this possible enhancement.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 at 09:11, Dan Haywood <d...@haywood-associates.co.uk> wrote: > Hi Jayesh, > thanks for your thoughts. > > With regard to XML vs annotations, you might have noticed that the > .layout.xml file is equivalent to (and overrides) the @XxxLayout > annotations (@DomainObjectLayout, @PropertyLayout, @CollectionLayout, > @ActionLayout). However, there is very deliberately *no* ability to use > XML for the non-layout annotations (@DomainObject, @Property, @Collection, > @Action etc). > > I tend to think of the metadata as relating either to the presentation > layer (ie the layout annotations) or intrinsic to the domain layer (the > non-layout annotations). And, obviously, the jdo annotations relate to the > persistence layer. So, the rule that we have is that the presentation > layer metadata can also be expressed in XML (so it can be dynamically > reloaded), but the domain layer metadata cannot because (unless using > jrebel or similar) a change to the domain would likely require a restart of > the application anyway) > > Hope that makes sense. > > Cheers, > Dan > > > On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 12:56, Jayesh Prajapati <jayesh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Dan >> >> I agree with both the options and would also be great if these can be >> configurable at xml file level. >> >> Having said this, based on my experience too many configurations are not >> good mainly because ... >> ... 1) Annotation guide is for advance users, meaning newbees will find it >> difficult >> ... 2) During deployment extreme cares are required because usually >> deployment are done by technical operations who are not familiar with such >> settings >> >> I will share more thoughts about such settings/config management at UI >> level. >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018, 17:18 Dan Haywood <d...@haywood-associates.co.uk >> wrote: >> >> > Submodules - yes, that's a good point, I hadn't considered that at all. >> > >> > I suppose it also makes sense to be able to specify using the Module >> > interface as well, to create some sort of search hierarchy : class -> >> > module -> global. >> > >> > But perhaps one step at a time. >> > >> > Thx! >> > Dan >> > >> > On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 11:27, Patrick Pliessnig <p.pliess...@gmx.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Dan >> > > >> > > In a reuse scenario a local configuration of the annotation property >> is >> > > certainly useful. I guess that if you want to integrate an existing >> > > subdomain module into a destination application, a configuration >> > > property at the class or module level could ease the job. >> > > >> > > Patrick >> > > >> > > >> > > Am 28.12.2018 um 11:54 schrieb Dan Haywood: >> > > > Hi folks, >> > > > >> > > > ... and happy holidays! >> > > > >> > > > We currently have the configuration property >> > > > "isis.reflector.explicitAnnotations.action" which if specified >> > > > requires @Action to be added as an annotation for all public methods >> > that >> > > > don't represent properties/collections or supporting methods. If >> this >> > is >> > > > enabled then there's generally no need to annotate public methods >> that >> > > > aren't meant to be in the metamodel with the @Programmatic >> annotation. >> > > > >> > > > Andi and I have just been discussing this (off-list) and wondering >> if >> > we >> > > > should extend this in v2. Our idea is maybe to allow this to be >> > > specified >> > > > at the class level, and to also have three levels rather than two: >> > > > >> > > > - explicit : all properties, collections and actions must be >> annotated >> > > > - actions : actions must be annotated, but properties and >> collections >> > > need >> > > > not. This is the behavior if the above configuration property is >> > > specified. >> > > > - implicit : no annotations are required. This is the current >> default >> > > > >> > > > So, we were thinking to add a value to @DomainObject, eg >> > > > >> > > > @DomainObject(metamodelDiscoveryStrategy = EXPLICIT | ACTIONS | >> > IMPLICIT >> > > | >> > > > AS_CONFIGURED) >> > > > >> > > > where "AS_CONFIGURED" would read a new configuration property that >> > would >> > > > take these three values (replacing the existing >> > > > "isis.reflector.explicitAnnotations.action". >> > > > >> > > > Two questions: >> > > > >> > > > 1. is the idea of a new level to explicitly annotate everything >> > > (properties >> > > > and collections as well as actions) useful ? >> > > > 2. is there a need to configure this on a class-by-class basis, or >> is a >> > > > global configuration property sufficient? >> > > > >> > > > Thx >> > > > Dan >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> >
