September 2012 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-17) Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified"

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir resolved CDI-17. -------------------------- Assignee: Pete Muir Fix Version/s: (was: TBD) Resolution: Rejected This is unfixable. > Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified" > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-17 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Javadoc and API > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Dan Allen > Assignee: Pete Muir > Priority: Minor > > As of the CDI 1.0 specification, the name of the Reception attribute on @Observes is "receive". The patch release of the API (SP1) changes the name to "notifyObserver", so a change is already being considered. Therefore, I'd like to suggest a better name that would read more fluently. That name is "notified". > Let us compare the three cases: > 1. @Observes(receive = IF_EXISTS) > 2. @Observes(notifyObserver = IF_EXISTS) > 3. @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS) > Of the three, notifyObserver breaks the flow of the sentence the most. On the other hand, notified reads nicely, including with the TransactionPhase attribute included: > @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS, during = TransactionPhase.AFTER_SUCCESS) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-17) Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified"

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir updated CDI-17: ------------------------- Comment: was deleted (was: Jens, I plan to just leave this open but unfixed for now.) > Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified" > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-17 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Javadoc and API > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Dan Allen > Priority: Minor > > As of the CDI 1.0 specification, the name of the Reception attribute on @Observes is "receive". The patch release of the API (SP1) changes the name to "notifyObserver", so a change is already being considered. Therefore, I'd like to suggest a better name that would read more fluently. That name is "notified". > Let us compare the three cases: > 1. @Observes(receive = IF_EXISTS) > 2. @Observes(notifyObserver = IF_EXISTS) > 3. @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS) > Of the three, notifyObserver breaks the flow of the sentence the most. On the other hand, notified reads nicely, including with the TransactionPhase attribute included: > @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS, during = TransactionPhase.AFTER_SUCCESS) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-17) Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified"

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-17: ------------------------------ Jens, I plan to just leave this open but unfixed for now. > Change name of the @Observes Reception attribute to "notified" > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-17 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-17 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Javadoc and API > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Dan Allen > Priority: Minor > > As of the CDI 1.0 specification, the name of the Reception attribute on @Observes is "receive". The patch release of the API (SP1) changes the name to "notifyObserver", so a change is already being considered. Therefore, I'd like to suggest a better name that would read more fluently. That name is "notified". > Let us compare the three cases: > 1. @Observes(receive = IF_EXISTS) > 2. @Observes(notifyObserver = IF_EXISTS) > 3. @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS) > Of the three, notifyObserver breaks the flow of the sentence the most. On the other hand, notified reads nicely, including with the TransactionPhase attribute included: > @Observes(notified = IF_EXISTS, during = TransactionPhase.AFTER_SUCCESS) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

Topics for meeting 3rd Sept

by Pete Muir

Hi all The main topic will be: * ordering an enablement of: - alternatives (enablement only) - interceptors - decorators - observer methods (ordering only) Please review CDI-4 and CDI-18 for background! Due to a busy week on other topics, I haven't got through very many issues, but do have these for review: * CDI-50, @Vetoed based on Mike's proposal from last week https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/91/files * CDI-177 redo proposal for defaulted @Named https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/77 I've also spent quite a bit of time working with Neil Griffin, Ken Finnigan and Mike Freedman on how we can get CDI to work well with portlets. I need to find time to write up the proposal but I think this is quite close to resolution.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-16) Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir updated CDI-16: ------------------------- Issue Type: Tracker (was: Feature Request) > Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration > ------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-16 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Tracker > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Fix For: TBD > > > Try to work out if we can improve on this. > At least, we should clarify what happens if a CDI managed bean is annotated with @ManagedBean -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-16) Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-16: ------------------------------ I did actually run through this with Bill and Linda and Jason Greene, and there isn't really any extra integration to do apart from deprecate the platforms @ManagedBean annotation. > Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration > ------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-16 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Fix For: TBD > > > Try to work out if we can improve on this. > At least, we should clarify what happens if a CDI managed bean is annotated with @ManagedBean -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-16) Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-16: ------------------------------ Jens, you are right, this is being considered at platform EG level. I have asked Bill and Linda to reopen the topic as it got left without resolution, and is blocking a lot of other discussions. If you have a comment, please do tell the platform EG users list ;-) > Improve EE 6 Managed Bean integration > ------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-16 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-16 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Fix For: TBD > > > Try to work out if we can improve on this. > At least, we should clarify what happens if a CDI managed bean is annotated with @ManagedBean -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-43) Allow Extensions to specify the annotations that they are interested in

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-43?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-43: ------------------------------ Agreed, I wanted to specify this in terms of qualifiers, but couldn't due to how arrays work today with qualifiers. > Allow Extensions to specify the annotations that they are interested in > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-43 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-43 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Portable Extensions > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Stuart Douglas > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1.PRD > > > Currently portable extensions that wish to look for a specific annotation have to look through all availible classes in the ProcessAnnotatatedType event, which is quite inefficient. It would be good if extensions could do something like: > public void processAnnotatedType(@Observes @RequireAnnotations({(a)Unwraps.class}) ProcessAnnotatedType pat) > This could allow the container to take advantage of annotation indexing to improve boot time performance, as well as reducing uneeded processing in the observer. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-258) Typo in Default name for a Session Bean

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

Pete Muir created CDI-258: ----------------------------- Summary: Typo in Default name for a Session Bean Key: CDI-258 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-258 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: 1.0 Reporter: Marina Vatkina Assignee: Pete Muir Fix For: 1.1.PRD {quote} 3.2.5. Default name for a session bean The default name for a >>>managed<<< bean is the unqualified class name of the session bean class, {quote} -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

1
1
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-180) Clarify request context lifecycle during remote method invocation of EJB

by Martin Kouba (Created) (JIRA)

Clarify request context lifecycle during remote method invocation of EJB ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Key: CDI-180 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-180 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Clarification Affects Versions: 1.0 Reporter: Martin Kouba CDI 1.0 spec states in *6.7.1. Request context lifecycle*: "The request scope is active: during any remote method invocation of any EJB" and "The request context is destroyed: after the EJB remote method invocation" However it doesn't cover various invocation scenarios. For example it's possible to do in-VM invocation (via remote interface) from the same deployment or from a different deployment. Is the request context shared in this case? Will be destroyed after the EJB remote method invocation? Also take into account that application servers often do optimization and handle remote interface calls in a local interface manner within the same JVM. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

12 years, 4 months

8
13
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev September 2012