[jsr-314-open] [jsf2next] PROJECT_STAGE system property configuration

Lincoln Baxter, III lincolnbaxter at gmail.com
Wed Jan 6 00:14:05 EST 2010


Ok, that's fine. I figured if it were something easy, it could be useful,
but there's no need to do something that people aren't demanding.

This has already been filed here:
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=499

--Lincoln

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:14 PM, Ed Burns <Ed.Burns at sun.com> wrote:

> >>>>> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:21:50 -0800, Jim Driscoll
> <Jim.Driscoll at Sun.COM> said:
>
> JD> On 1/3/10 12:45 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> >> I'd like to revisit this for JSF2.1 -
> >>
> https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=499
> >>
> >> Project stage is something that needs to be configurable without
> >> modifying the underlying WAR (and while JNDI support is provided, it
> >> requires container configuration, admittedly not a huge downside.)
> >> However, for those who do not primarily use JNDI for configuration, a
> >> -D system property makes a lot of sense.
>
> JD> That sounds like something that could be handy - please file an RFE.
>
> >> I'd also like to propose one other enhancement, which is runtime
> >> configuration of the PROJECT_STAGE through an exposed API. This is
> >> something that I think should be able to turn on and off while the
> >> server is running (For the same reason it must be possible to enable
> >> or disable debug logging or auditing at runtime.)
>
> JD> That has performance implications - for instance, we do some setup of
> JD> the application based on project stage that would be awkward to change
> JD> on the fly.  Offhand, I'm not in favor of this change, since that
> JD> complicates the runtime behavior for what must be a rather small corner
> JD> case.  If you have a compelling use case, you might change my mind, but
> JD> keep in mind that implementing this is not as simple as it may appear
> at
> JD> first blush.
>
> I also am not in favor of this change.  We make a lot of assumptions
> about the immutability of the ProjectStage value at runtime.
>
> Ed
>
> --
> | ed.burns at sun.com  | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
> | homepage:         | http://ridingthecrest.com/
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
"Keep it Simple"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20100106/d52b0740/attachment.html 


More information about the jsr-314-open-mirror mailing list