[jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] Fwd: Dynamisches Einschalten Development Mode

Sun Mar 28 15:30:56 EDT 2010

Hi Ganesh,

I am not sure this deals with the same thing. The old mail deals with
one context parameter, which decides if we are in development mode or
not. The thing I suggested above is have every configuration parameter
optionally be an el-expression, so that everything is configurable by
however the user wants to configure it.

The later would be a lot more fine-grained than the first.

best regards,

Martin

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ganesh <ganesh at j4fry.org> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> We had a long thread on this in January. I'm including below the last
> message of Ed on this issue.
>
> Best regards,
> Ganesh
>
> Martin Marinschek schrieb:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> find attached feedback from a workshop participant. He would like to
>> have web-inf parameters which can be set programmatically or evaluated
>> via EL (and point to an application scoped bean, I would say). Do we
>> already plan to support this? (for me, EL evaluation seems to be the
>> way to go, but are there any issues with timing here? will we need to
>> evaluate params before the basic setup for doing this is there?)
>>
>> If this can not make it in the spec, Ryan, Leonardo, can we think
>> about supporting this in the implementations?
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Heinz HUBER <hhuber at racon-linz.at>
>> Date: 2010/3/24
>> Subject: Dynamisches Einschalten Development Mode
>> To: martin at marinschek.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Hallo Hr Marinschek,
>>
>> wie heute kurz besprochen, wäre es interessant, wenn man den
>> Deveolpment Mode und ähnliche Features (zB Pretty Html) dynamisch
>> steuern könnte.
>> Bei uns die Anforderung an die Entwicklung, dass daselbe EAR
>> (respektive WAR) in Test und Produktion eingesetzt sein muss.
>> Zur Sicherheit sind daher diese Einstellungen im web.xml alle deaktiviert.
>>
>> Jetzt wäre es allerdings schön, wenn man diese in Test (entweder
>> generell oder bei Bedarf) aktivieren könnte. Wobei hier eine Steuerung
>> auf Basis VM-Variablen natürlich ausreichend ist.
>> Bei dem Termin heute kam dafür die Idee, EL für diese Settings zu
>> erlauben.
>> Wäre interessant, wenn irgendeine Steuerungsmöglichkeit in den
>> Standeard aufgenommen würde.
>>
>> Freundliche Grüße
>> Mag. Heinz HUBER
>>
>> Software-Entwicklung dezentrale Systeme
>> RACON Software GmbH
>> A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80
>> Tel: +43 732 6929 1664
>> Fax: +43 732 6929 1488
>> mailto:hhuber at racon-linz.at
>> http://www.racon-linz.at
>> RACON Software Gesellschaft m.b.H., A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80, FN
>> 86804d, Landesgericht Linz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit o.a. Absender via e-mail dient
>> ausschließlich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschäftliche Erklärungen
>> dürfen über dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden.
>>
>> Correspondence with a.m. sender via e-mail is only for information
>> purposes. This medium is not to be used for the exchange of
>> legally-binding communications.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2next] PROJECT_STAGE    system  property
>    configuration
> Datum: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:43:23 -0800
> Von: Ed Burns <Ed.Burns at Sun.COM>
> Antwort an: jsr-314-open at jcp.org
> An: jsr-314-open at jcp.org
> Referenzen: <a3f2f0581001031245q1015dd3aj9c38974868584aff at mail.gmail.com>
>     <4B441C89.60507 at horstmann.com> <19268.52433.349823.315935 at sun.com>
>  <4B44E401.3020205 at horstmann.com> <19276.57985.963365.57446 at sun.com>
> <4B4DD7CF.1090505 at horstmann.com> <4B4F5E6E.50401 at oracle.com>
>  <4B4F718F.2070500 at horstmann.com> <4B4F7B5A.90101 at oracle.com>
>  <4B54822D.7000108 at horstmann.com>
>  <a3f2f0581001181046n2b6dd445g457837ad8bde6396 at mail.gmail.com>
> <4B54C194.9050203 at oracle.com> <19286.9912.390042.837832 at sun.com>
>  <4B562C1C.5060808 at oracle.com>
>
>>>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:03:08 -0500, Andy Schwartz
>>>>>> <andy.schwartz at oracle.com> said:
>
> AS> Personally I don't understand the nature of the objection.  In some case
> AS> fine-grained (application-specific) control is desired.  We have AS>
> addressed this case via the context parameter.  There seems to be AS>
> general agreement in our EG that a system-level property would also be AS>
> beneficial and in particular would improve the ease of use of this AS>
> feature for development-time scenarios (ie. no need for a web.xml or AS>
> JNDI config).  Not sure why we need to choose one approach vs. the AS>
> other.  Both serve a purpose.
>
> EB> In fact, I'm on the phone with Bill Shannon, Roberto Chinnici, Rajiv
> EB> Mordani, and the Sun EE architects right now for our weekly meeting.  I
> EB> have requested a timeslot to bring this up (again) there.  I'm glad I'm
> EB> on the phone because otherwise, I might get tomatoes thrown in my face.
>
> AS> Wow, sounds harsh.  I guess I am missing why this is so
> controversial.
>
> I brought this issue to the Sun JavaEE Architecture meeting on Tuesday
> 19 January 2010.  This meeting happens mostly weekly and is where the
> Sun EE Spec leads coordinate efforts to drive JavaEE spec efforts to
> completion.  The technical leadership at this meeting includes Bill
> Shannon, Sun Distinguised Engineer and past JavaEE spec lead, and
> Roberto Chinnici JavaEE 6 spec lead.
>
> I brought up two issues regarding ProjectStage
>
> 1. revive the drive to expose ProjectStage to lower level technologies
> in EE.
>
> 2. have a System property to set the ProjectStage.
>
> For 1), the following questions were raised:
>
> * What specific use-cases exist for having ProjectStage at the servlet
>  level?  If the Servlet EG reviewed the proposal and ultimately
>  rejected it, why bring it up again?
>
> * What about Gavin King's "alternatives" proposal?
>
>  Pete Muir has clarified at this meeting that the "alternatives"
>  proposal from Gavin did not make it into CDI in such a way as to be
>  appropriate for our needs in the ProjectStage feature.
>
> For 2), the following points were raised:
>
> * There are no other System Properties in all of EE.  Why do we need one
>  now?
>
> * Why, specifically, does this system property need to be a part of the
>  portable programming model?
>
>  I voiced that it's useful in cases like mvn jetty run, or mvn tomcat
>  run.  Bill countered that such usages are already container specific,
>  so it would best be addressed with a container specific configuration.
>
> In conclusion, I think we should close this spec issue and handle the
> System Property at the impl level.  I have opened issue 1539 for this
> case.  I will send a separate email regarding this issue.
>
>>>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:07:13 -0500, "Lincoln Baxter, III"
>>>>>> <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> said:
>
> LB> We should also probably decide and state that configuration defined in
> LB> web.xml will override the system property.. or visa versa. Though I
> think
> LB> the former allows more fine grained control.
>
> LB> I am in favor of the System property overriding web.xml. I don't think
> it
> LB> makes sense otherwise.
>
> I agree also.
>
> DA> For the implementations, it might be a good idea to borrow the log
> message
> DA> the Wicket uses when running in development mode.
>
> DA> ********************************************************************
> DA> *** WARNING: JavaServer Faces is running in DEVELOPMENT mode.    ***
> DA> ***                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^          ***
> DA> *** Do NOT deploy to your live server(s) without changing this.  ***
> DA> *** See Application#getProjectStage() for more information.      ***
> DA> ********************************************************************
>
> Yes, I've added that to the issue.
>
>
> Ed
> --
> | ed.burns at sun.com  | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
> | homepage:         | http://ridingthecrest.com/
>
>
> --
> "There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe there are two
> kinds of people and those who don't."
> — Robert Benchley
> --
> "There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe there are two
> kinds of people and those who don't."
> — Robert Benchley
>
>

-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces