Re: [aerogear-dev] [aerogear-controller] Configuration

>i dislike xml configuration files, so i would vote for an Annotation. Yeah, I agree and we are avoiding any xml right now. So, how about we provide some hopefully good defaults for CORS and then users can provide there own @Producer. We will provide at builder api to create the config instance so it won't be a lot of work for users. Should CORS be enabled by default? On 13 November 2012 13:35, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > I'm working on adding CORS support there are several things that can be > configured in this case. Below is an example of the options that are > currently available: > > public interface CorsConfiguration { > > public abstract boolean isCorsSupportEnabled(); > > public abstract boolean exposeHeaders(); > > public abstract String getExposeHeaders(); > > public abstract boolean anyOrigin(); > > public abstract boolean allowCookies(); > > public abstract boolean hasMaxAge(); > > public abstract long getMaxAge(); > > public abstract Set<String> getValidRequestMethods(); > > public abstract Set<String> getValidRequestHeaders(); > > } > > How do we want users to configure these configuration options? Using a > CDI annotation with "sensible" default values or specify them in web.xml? > > > i dislike xml configuration files, so i would vote for an Annotation. > but thats personal preference > > > cheers, > > /Dan > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >