December 2016 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-593) Mention javax.enterprise.inject.spi.Prioritized in spec text and improve its javadoc

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-593: ------------------------------------------ [~mkouba] do we agree on this usage: bq. a custom bean being an alternative can implement it to be activated globaly > Mention javax.enterprise.inject.spi.Prioritized in spec text and improve its javadoc > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-593 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-593 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > * javadoc would definitely deserve some more info > * the spec text should mention this interface as well and describe basic use cases (e.g. an interceptor passed to {{AfterBeanDiscovery.addBean()}} and implementing this interface is globally enabled) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-655) Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand edited comment on CDI-655 at 12/2/16 10:48 AM: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Will use {{Prioritized}} in the API, dealing directly with {{@Priority}} at spec level will force to add dependency on commons annotation. was (Author: antoinesabot-durand): Will use {{Prioritized}} in the API, dealing directly with {{@Priority}} at spec level will force to add dependency on commons annotation. Spec doc will mention @Priority. > Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-655 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Right now, the CDI class takes the first provider whose {{javax.enterprise.inject.spi.CDIProvider.getCDI()}} does not return null. It might be useful to allow the CDIProvider authors to specify a priority (either by @Priority or by Prioritized) and sort the discovered providers so that those with higher priority are taken first. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-655) Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-655: ------------------------------------------ Will use {{Prioritized}} in the API, dealing directly with {{@Priority}} at spec level will force to add dependency on commons annotation. Spec doc will mention @Priority. > Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-655 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Right now, the CDI class takes the first provider whose {{javax.enterprise.inject.spi.CDIProvider.getCDI()}} does not return null. It might be useful to allow the CDIProvider authors to specify a priority (either by @Priority or by Prioritized) and sort the discovered providers so that those with higher priority are taken first. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

Review, review review

by Antoine Sabot-Durand

Hi all, If we want to stick to our agenda and release Weld 3.0.0 beta1 before Christmas we really need the pending PR (with the critical one in priority) to be reviewed ASAP. So please, try to find a few minutes to give your feedback to correct these, and if you don't nothing to add or correct give an approval to these PR. We did a great work together on CDI 2.0, I know it's not always easy to find time to work on it, but we really need an extra effort to meet our release date in January. Thanks a lot, Antoine

8 years

2
1
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-657) Introduce ProcessSyntheticObserverMethod

by Martin Kouba (JIRA)

Martin Kouba created CDI-657: -------------------------------- Summary: Introduce ProcessSyntheticObserverMethod Key: CDI-657 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-657 Project: CDI Specification Issues Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Portable Extensions Reporter: Martin Kouba Assignee: Martin Kouba Priority: Minor Fix For: 2.0 .Final Also clarify {{ProcessObserverMethod.getAnnotatedMethod()}} for a custom implementation of the {{ObserverMethod}}. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-439) ProcessBean event section - make a reference to AfterBeanDiscovery#addBean()

by Martin Kouba (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-439?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Martin Kouba reassigned CDI-439: -------------------------------- Assignee: Martin Kouba > ProcessBean event section - make a reference to AfterBeanDiscovery#addBean() > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-439 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-439 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Affects Versions: 1.2.Final > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Martin Kouba > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Right now, "11.5.10. ProcessBean event" does not state anything about the fact that {{AfterBeanDiscovery#addBean()}} fires an event of type {{ProcessBean}} (no subtype as the info is not available for custom Bean implementation). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-655) Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Work on CDI-655 started by Antoine Sabot-Durand. ------------------------------------------------ > Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-655 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Right now, the CDI class takes the first provider whose {{javax.enterprise.inject.spi.CDIProvider.getCDI()}} does not return null. It might be useful to allow the CDIProvider authors to specify a priority (either by @Priority or by Prioritized) and sort the discovered providers so that those with higher priority are taken first. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-655) Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand reassigned CDI-655: ---------------------------------------- Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Allow CDIProvider to specify the priority > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-655 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-655 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Fix For: 2.0 .Final > > > Right now, the CDI class takes the first provider whose {{javax.enterprise.inject.spi.CDIProvider.getCDI()}} does not return null. It might be useful to allow the CDIProvider authors to specify a priority (either by @Priority or by Prioritized) and sort the discovered providers so that those with higher priority are taken first. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-541) Ordering of async observers (vs sync observers) is not specified

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-541?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand edited comment on CDI-541 at 12/1/16 10:20 AM: -------------------------------------------------------------------- You're right [~mkouba], but it's a smaller topic. I created CDI-656 to track this clarification. The current ticket is still relevant for 2.1 should we decide to order async events. was (Author: antoinesabot-durand): You're right [~mkouba], but it's a samller topic. I created CDI-656 to track this clarification. The current ticket is still relevant for 2.1 should we decide to order async events. > Ordering of async observers (vs sync observers) is not specified > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-541 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-541 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Events > Affects Versions: 2.0-EDR1 > Reporter: Tomas Remes > Fix For: 2.1 (Discussion) > > > I think this needs to be specified. E.g. what happens if I fire async event and have more matching sync and async observers? Are all sync observes called first in given order with no regard to async observers priority? > For example: > {{event.fireAsync(new Message());}} > {code} > public class First { > > void observeMessage(@Observes @Priority(2000) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Second { > > void observeMessage(@ObservesAsync @Priority(2100) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Third { > > void observeMessage(@Observes @Priority(2200) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Fourth { > > void observeMessage(@ObservesAsync @Priority(2300) Message message){} > } > {code} > What will be the order in this case? First, Third, Second, Fourth? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-541) Ordering of async observers (vs sync observers) is not specified

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-541?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-541: ------------------------------------------ You're right [~mkouba], but it's a samller topic. I created CDI-656 to track this clarification. The current ticket is still relevant for 2.1 should we decide to order async events. > Ordering of async observers (vs sync observers) is not specified > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-541 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-541 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Events > Affects Versions: 2.0-EDR1 > Reporter: Tomas Remes > Fix For: 2.1 (Discussion) > > > I think this needs to be specified. E.g. what happens if I fire async event and have more matching sync and async observers? Are all sync observes called first in given order with no regard to async observers priority? > For example: > {{event.fireAsync(new Message());}} > {code} > public class First { > > void observeMessage(@Observes @Priority(2000) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Second { > > void observeMessage(@ObservesAsync @Priority(2100) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Third { > > void observeMessage(@Observes @Priority(2200) Message message){} > } > {code} > {code} > public class Fourth { > > void observeMessage(@ObservesAsync @Priority(2300) Message message){} > } > {code} > What will be the order in this case? First, Third, Second, Fourth? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.2.3#72005)

8 years

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev December 2016