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

Tue Mar 30 15:28:25 EDT 2010

Isn´t this all the same domain as the dynamic configuration we have been
discussing in a different thread.

Werner

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Martin Marinschek
<mmarinschek at apache.org>wrote:

> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20100330/0b7c496f/attachment-0002.html 