Le 15 avr. 2015 à 17:08, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> a écrit
:
> On 15 Apr 2015, at 13:31, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Rethinking of this task and reading the feedback on this, I really think we should go
step by step on this splitting.
>
> What I have produced here is a full extraction of EJB in the spec to put it in EE
part.
Yes, this is a great start.
> There are still Java EE references in core with EL, JSF, Servlet.
I’m least worried about EL, most about JSF and Serlet.
I’m not sure about JSF. Servlet is still here mainly because of contexts. As we'll
probably change a few things in context (if we add context control for instance) perhaps
and complete review of chapter 6 (scopes and context) will be necessary...
>
> The more problematic part is the Contexts chapter: hard to remove servlet ref without
rewriting all...
>
> And yes, I did some rewording that could be no very nice.
>
> In some places I replaces "Managed Beans or Session Beans" by the generic
term "bean”.
This is definitely not ok, as you expanded the scope of the sentence to include built-in
beans, producer methods, producer fields, and custom beans. I would suggest providing list
of these changes, so we can review each one.
Agree, on the paper that looks messy. I did it when I thought that the rules applied to
all kind of beans, for others places I had to remove "session bean” mention (letting
only managed bean) and recreate a similar section in EE part stating that rules in section
foo of core was also valid for session beans.
I’ll create a list of these generic change since it’ll be easier to check if I didn’t made
a mistake.
> Java EE component was replaced by component (yes, I'm not sure it is very
meaningful)
I also think this is problematic. A Java EE component is a specific thing. I would
suggest providing list of these changes, so we can review each one.
We have to find a new terminology. I’m a bit clueless her. Will list the places as well.
>
> In the EE part, I added changed all "session bean" occurrences by "EJB
session bean”.
Ok, I don’t think this is a problem.
We have a ticket staying that we should clarify the term beans in the spec.
>
> The step I see are:
>
> 0) Validate that we're all ok with the principle of splitting
> 1) validate that all EJB references are removed from core
> 2) Correct bad terminology that I introduced
>
> And then we should continue the splitting by rewriting the contexts chapter and EL
references in Core.
+1
I guess that everybody is ok with 0 by now. 1 is in process and shouldn’t be too hard, 2
is the trickiest one.
I’ll produce this list by the end of the week so we can discuss of each occurrences.
>
> Antoine
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under
the Apache License, Version 2 (
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all
other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual
property rights inherent in such information.