August 2012 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-206) Conversation related exceptions cannot be handled

by Jozef Hartinger (Created) (JIRA)

Conversation related exceptions cannot be handled ------------------------------------------------- Key: CDI-206 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-206 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Bug Components: Contexts Affects Versions: 1.1.EDR1 Reporter: Jozef Hartinger Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed) This issue emerged after adding support for conversations as part of CDI-80 The spec says: {quote}The conversation associated with a Servlet request is determined at the beginning of the request before calling any service() method of any servlet in the web application, calling the doFilter() method of any servlet filter in the web application and before the container calls any ServletRequestListener or AsyncListener in the web application. {quote} and {quote} If the propagated conversation cannot be restored, the container must associate the request with a new transient conversation and throw an exception of type javax.enterprise.context.NonexistentConversationException. The container ensures that a long-running conversation may be associated with at most one request at a time, by blocking or rejecting concurrent requests. If the container rejects a request, it must associate the request with a new transient conversation and throw an exception of type javax.enterprise.context.BusyConversationException. {quote} The conversation association is supposed to be done before any servlet, filter or listener is invoked. If the association fails (due to NonexistentConversationException or BusyConversationException), the application has no way of handling this failure gracefully. The Servlet error-page mechanism cannot be used portably because it is only handling uncaught exceptions thrown from a servlet / filter. Similarly, a commonly used exception handling mechanism - an outer filter that catches every uncaught exception, cannot be used since the association failure does not occur within the filter invocation. -- 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

11 years, 5 months

5
9
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Created: (CDI-139) Support for unmanaged instances

by Joshua Davis (JIRA)

Support for unmanaged instances ------------------------------- Key: CDI-139 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-139 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Beans Affects Versions: 1.0 Reporter: Joshua Davis Allow the creation of unmanaged instances. The CDI context will not keep track of these instances and the application will be responsible for cleaning them up. This is a fairly typical usage of other DI frameworks such as Guice and PicoContainer. Currently, if an ApplicationScoped object injects an {{Instance<T>}} interface, CDI will manage all instances returned by the {{get()}} method as dependents of the application scoped object. Those instances will be kept in memory by the CDI implementation and will only be GC'd when the application scoped object is destroyed (at the end of the application). This may look like a memory leak to the user (see WELD-920). >From P. Muir on WELD-920 {quote} We can describe instances which are attached (as the CDI 1.0 spec requires) as "managed" instances, and those which the user takes responsibility for cleaning up themselves as "unmanaged" instances. In CDI 1.1 I would like to add support for unmanaged instances (the impl will just hand these over and forget about them) and also to allow the app to request an unmanaged instance is cleaned up. Please can someone file a CDI issue for this? Weld could certainly be more friendly and more proactively discard instances. Ideas: 1) Analyse the dependent instance graph, and if there are no @PreDestroy/@Disposer callbacks on in the graph, do not store the dependent instance for cleanup (this would be a good general optimization (2) Add a config option to allow instances created from Instance to be held only as long as the app holds a reference, and if the app doesn't hold a reference for it's lifetime, then Weld would not do any cleanup (Weld would hold a weak ref). {quote} -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

11 years, 5 months

6
18
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-194) Allow AnnotatedType for a given Bean to be obtained

by Jozef Hartinger (Created) (JIRA)

Allow AnnotatedType for a given Bean to be obtained --------------------------------------------------- Key: CDI-194 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-194 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Portable Extensions Affects Versions: 1.0 Reporter: Jozef Hartinger Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed) See Stuart's comment on CDI-83. -- 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

11 years, 5 months

5
18
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-239) Define Extension notification rules for shared libraries

by Mark Struberg (JIRA)

Mark Struberg created CDI-239: --------------------------------- Summary: Define Extension notification rules for shared libraries Key: CDI-239 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-239 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Clarification Components: Portable Extensions Affects Versions: 1.1.EDR1 Reporter: Mark Struberg Consider an EAR file with a shared xy.JAR file in the EARs ./lib folder with an @EnterpriseApplicationScoped class X and a @RequestScoped class Y The EAR also contains 2 web applications WebAppA and WebAppB. WebAppA has ExtensionA in it's WEB-INF/classes and WebAppB has ExtensionB in it's classes both with a public void met(@Observes ProcessAnnotatedType pat) and each modifying the AnnotatedType. What should happen here? Will there be 2 Bean<T> for X and 2 for Y? (one Bean for each WebApp)? or will X and Y not trigger a ProcessAnnotatedType for the extensions defined in the webapps (but only for Extensions defined in the shared ear lib)? -- 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

11 years, 5 months

2
2
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-218) Honor WEB-INF/classes/META-INF/beans.xml to activate WEB-INF/classes a bean archive

by Dan Allen (JIRA)

Dan Allen created CDI-218: ----------------------------- Summary: Honor WEB-INF/classes/META-INF/beans.xml to activate WEB-INF/classes a bean archive Key: CDI-218 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-218 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Packaging and Deployment Reporter: Dan Allen Priority: Minor Chapter 12.1 specifies that beans.xml must be in the WEB-INF directory of a web archive to activate the WEB-INF/classes directory of that war as a bean archive (and thus make java:comp/BeanManager visible to the web app). However, many developers find this location both confusing and inconvenient at times. The instinct of many developers is to put the beans.xml in WEB-INF/classes/META-INF since that follows the convention that applies to library jars. Obviously, we cannot break backwards compatibility. Therefore, this issue proposes to honor either location in the war: - WEB-INF/beans.xml - WEB-INF/classes/META-INF/beans.xml If both files are present, the WEB-INF/beans.xml should take precedence and a warning is recommended. (Merging them is not likely the behavior that a developer would want). -- 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

11 years, 5 months

6
21
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-247) It's currently not possible to implement a primitive and wrapping type producer method for the same type

by Mark Struberg (JIRA)

Mark Struberg created CDI-247: --------------------------------- Summary: It's currently not possible to implement a primitive and wrapping type producer method for the same type Key: CDI-247 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-247 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Bug Components: Concepts Affects Versions: 1.1.EDR1, 1.0 Reporter: Mark Struberg Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed) -- 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

11 years, 5 months

5
13
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-234) behavior of arrays without @Nonbinding

by Romain Manni-Bucau (JIRA)

Romain Manni-Bucau created CDI-234: -------------------------------------- Summary: behavior of arrays without @Nonbinding Key: CDI-234 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-234 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Clarification Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau The spec says: "Array-valued or annotation-valued members of a qualifier type should be annotated @Nonbinding in a portable application. If an array-valued or annotation-valued member of a qualifier type is not annotated @Nonbinding, non-portable behavior results." The case of arrays without this annotation should be managed to get a better portability. Two arraysequality is determined through "Arrays" helper (http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.5.0/docs/api/java/lang/annotation/Annotat...) so i don't think there is any technical issue to consider arrays as a field. -- 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

11 years, 5 months

3
21
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-225) Clarify whether bean discovery MAY or MUST NOT include class loading

by Harald Wellmann (JIRA)

Harald Wellmann created CDI-225: ----------------------------------- Summary: Clarify whether bean discovery MAY or MUST NOT include class loading Key: CDI-225 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-225 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Clarification Components: Resolution Affects Versions: 1.1.EDR1 Reporter: Harald Wellmann The CDI 1.0 spec and also the current 1.1 draft is rather vague about the issue of class loading vs. class file byte code scanning for bean discovery. By default, I would assume the term "class" in a specification to refer to a loaded class, unless explicitly stated otherwise. A feature like Seam Solder's {code} @Requires(OptionalDependency.class) public class OptionalBean {code} will necessarily break if the CDI container loads OptionalBean during bean discovery - when OptionalDepencency is not available, OptionalBean cannot be loaded, and the CDI container won't even see the @Requires annotation. See also http://seamframework.org/Seam3/Compatibility, Section Overzealous class scanner. The way I read the CDI spec, GlassFish is fully spec compliant (but maybe not very efficient) in loading bean archive classes for the purpose of discovery. @Requires is also spec compliant, but not portable because it tacitly assumes that classes get scanned but not loaded. So if scanning in place of loading has been a tacit assumption of the CDI 1.0 authors all the time, it should be made explicit in CDI 1.1. Otherwise, if loading is also a valid option, this should be clearly stated so that extension authors will not rely on accidental features of a given CDI implementation. -- 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

11 years, 5 months

3
5
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-229) introduce @OverridesAttribute for @StereoType

by Mark Struberg (JIRA)

Mark Struberg created CDI-229: --------------------------------- Summary: introduce @OverridesAttribute for @StereoType Key: CDI-229 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-229 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Beans Affects Versions: 1.1.EDR1 Reporter: Mark Struberg We recently had a thread on the DeltaSpike list about using StereoTypes in real world applications: http://markmail.org/thread/uqozhsix2znwiebn ------ Imagine the following Stereotype for my Services (I spare out the standard stuff) @StereoType @Secured @Transactional @ApplicationScoped public @interface @Service {} The problem here is that there is no way to 'propagate' any rolesAllowed from @Service to @Secured, etc. What I'd like to have is something like ... public @interface @Service { String[] rolesAllowed(); TransactionAttributeType transactionType(); } where the rolesAllowed() would get propagated to the @Secured meta-annotation and transactionType() to the @Transactional ----------- Gerhard Petracek now pointed me to a cool feature which is used in JSR-303 BVAL: @OverridesAttribute http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/6/api/javax/validation/OverridesAttribute.html We should ping the BVAL EG for the details. There are quite a few little tricks and side effects to consider. On the implementation side, we could e.g. pick the @StereoType annotation and automatically propagate those values to the AnnotatedType which get's passed to the Extensions -- 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

11 years, 5 months

5
7
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-223) Clarify that any EJB "remote" invocation which doesn't occur when an existing request context is active, starts/ends it's own request context

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

Pete Muir created CDI-223: ----------------------------- Summary: Clarify that any EJB "remote" invocation which doesn't occur when an existing request context is active, starts/ends it's own request context Key: CDI-223 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-223 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Clarification Reporter: Pete Muir This should apply to JVM-local or JVM-remote remote invocations -- 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

11 years, 5 months

3
17
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev August 2012