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?

cheers, /Dan _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>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 > >

Hi my friend, at first glance looks like the XML option is more readable. But before we move forward I'd like to hear more opinions about it. -- "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato - @abstractj - Volenti Nihil Difficile On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: > To help clarify the options here the following gist contains examples of the two suggestions provided so far: > https://gist.github.com/4066691 > > > > > On 13 November 2012 16:49, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com(mailto: daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com)&gt; wrote: > > > 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(mailto: lholmqui(a)redhat.com)&gt; wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Daniel Bevenius < daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> 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 (http://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 (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@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

Thanks for the feedback guys! Going to wait a little longer so everyone who wants to can have a say. On 14 November 2012 14:16, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > Hi firends, > My preference goes for XML config. CORS is more a "external" config aspect > rather than being part of the "domain/core". > Seb > > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; > wrote: >> >> Hi my friend, at first glance looks like the XML option is more readable. >> >> But before we move forward I'd like to hear more opinions about it. >> >> >> -- >> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato >> - >> @abstractj >> - >> Volenti Nihil Difficile >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: >> >> > To help clarify the options here the following gist contains examples >> > of the two suggestions provided so far: >> > https://gist.github.com/4066691 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On 13 November 2012 16:49, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com >> > (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> wrote: >> > > > 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 >> > > (mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com)> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Daniel Bevenius >> > > > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> 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 (http://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 >> > > > > (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) >> > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list >> > > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) >> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aerogear-dev mailing list >> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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

I've asked this in the user forum too: https://community.jboss.org/thread/213370?tstart=0 On 14 November 2012 14:33, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: there is pros and cons in both (think spring (java config VS verbose xml) I guess if we keep it minimal a xml file is fine... -M On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Thanks for the feedback guys! > Going to wait a little longer so everyone who wants to can have a say. > > > On 14 November 2012 14:16, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >> Hi firends, >> My preference goes for XML config. CORS is more a "external" config aspect >> rather than being part of the "domain/core". >> Seb >> >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi my friend, at first glance looks like the XML option is more readable. >>> >>> But before we move forward I'd like to hear more opinions about it. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato >>> - >>> @abstractj >>> - >>> Volenti Nihil Difficile >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: >>> >>> > To help clarify the options here the following gist contains examples >>> > of the two suggestions provided so far: >>> > https://gist.github.com/4066691 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On 13 November 2012 16:49, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com >>> > (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> wrote: >>> > > > 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 >>> > > (mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com)> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Daniel Bevenius >>> > > > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> 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 (http://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 >>> > > > > (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) >>> > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list >>> > > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) >>> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > aerogear-dev mailing list >>> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@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 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ 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

>Dan, for all effects this forum is dead for good :) Not completely dead yet, there was one reply in favour of CDI ;) On 14 November 2012 18:00, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: > Dan, for all effects this forum is dead for good :) > > This ML is our forum :) > > On Nov 14, 2012, at 11:44 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: > > > I've asked this in the user forum too: > > https://community.jboss.org/thread/213370?tstart=0 > > > > > > On 14 November 2012 14:33, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; > wrote: > > there is pros and cons in both (think spring (java config VS verbose > xml) > > > > I guess if we keep it minimal a xml file is fine... > > > > -M > > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Daniel Bevenius > > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > Thanks for the feedback guys! > > > Going to wait a little longer so everyone who wants to can have a say. > > > > > > > > > On 14 November 2012 14:16, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi firends, > > >> My preference goes for XML config. CORS is more a "external" config > aspect > > >> rather than being part of the "domain/core". > > >> Seb > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Bruno Oliveira < > bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hi my friend, at first glance looks like the XML option is more > readable. > > >>> > > >>> But before we move forward I'd like to hear more opinions about it. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato > > >>> - > > >>> @abstractj > > >>> - > > >>> Volenti Nihil Difficile > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > To help clarify the options here the following gist contains > examples > > >>> > of the two suggestions provided so far: > > >>> > https://gist.github.com/4066691 > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On 13 November 2012 16:49, Daniel Bevenius < > daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com > > >>> > (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> wrote: > > >>> > > > 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 > > >>> > > (mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com)> wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 4:18 AM, Daniel Bevenius > > >>> > > > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> > 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 (http://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 > > >>> > > > > (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) > > >>> > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > _______________________________________________ > > >>> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > >>> > > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto: > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org) > > >>> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > _______________________________________________ > > >>> > aerogear-dev mailing list > > >>> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@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 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > -- qmx > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >