[forge-dev] Obtaining project name in persistence provider

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

I don't think Project should be injectable in Forge 2. Doesn't make sense
with the new design. There is no "current project". Not sure we will have
such a concept other than what the UISelection provides (as we have done in
the AbstractProjectCommand :)


On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:

> And yes, it was possible to do that in Forge 1. Shouldn't be too hard to
> implemebt though. All you need to do is implement UIContextListener and
> listen for UIContext started events :)
>
> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it
> uses the Maven facet under the hood.
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov <
> ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
>>
>> BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through
>> the Maven facet? Do we always have that on a project?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to
>>> be reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>>>
>>> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA
>>> for it?
>>>
>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>
>>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
>>> produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object
>>> to pollute the interface if it's used in just one of the implementations?
>>> And we can even do without it, as you noted.
>>>
>>> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
>>> thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>>>
>>> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
>>>> it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>>>
>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>
>>>> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, George!
>>>>
>>>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do
>>>> it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ivan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald at redhat.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey Ivan,
>>>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as
>>>>> a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the
>>>>> DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> George Gastaldi
>>>>>
>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>
>>>>> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not
>>>>> a big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to
>>>>> the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should
>>>>> bear the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
>>>>> <projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the
>>>>> persistence provider?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20140125/2ec2207b/attachment-0001.html