I looked at the methods under *InterceptionFactory*. To me, it sounds better to rename it to InterceptorConfigurator as it has .configure() plus it configures or wraps the classes.

Thoughts?

Many thanks,
Emily
===========================
Emily Jiang
WebSphere Application Server, CDI Development Lead
 
MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
Phone:  +44 (0)1962 816278  Internal: 246278

Email: emijiang@uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB



From:        John Ament <john.ament@spartasystems.com>
To:        Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Date:        08/11/2016 17:17
Subject:        Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by:        cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org



I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.




From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 12:04 PM
To: John Ament; cdi-dev
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
 

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:38 PM John Ament <john.ament@spartasystems.com> wrote:
If the only use case is for inceptors, I agree to InterceptionFactory.

What other use case you are thinking of John?


 


From: cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org> on behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 8:30 AM
To: cdi-dev

Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
+1 for InterceptionFactory, too.
It sounds simpler.
Werner


On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, <cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
       cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       cdi-dev-owner@lists.jboss.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory (Mark Struberg)
  2. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
     (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
  3. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
     (Romain Manni-Bucau)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 16:58:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
       <antoine@sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.


LieGrue,
strub



On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Hello Antoine,
>
>
>concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a proxying adding spec features over invocations) which is less "cglib-like" than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the list InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business method anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very useful to go that deep in the naming I think.
>
>
>
>Romain Manni-Bucau
>@rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
>
>2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>:
>
>Hi all,
>>
>>
>>In my last review for CDI-580 (https://github.com/cdi-spec/ cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec doc following various feedback.
>>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with Proxy, so we really need to find it a new name.
>>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
>>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
>>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is it clear from user pov?)
>>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial name)
>>- InterceptionEnhancer
>>
>>
>>Feedback and other names are welcome.
>>
>>
>>Antoine
>>______________________________ _________________
>>cdi-dev mailing list
>>cdi-dev@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.
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>cdi-dev mailing list
>cdi-dev@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.
>
>


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>,  Romain Manni-Bucau
       <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
       <CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

+1 for InterceptionFactory as well. I change my PR with this name.

Romain, for the record, mentioning "business method invocation" and
paragraph 7.2 is the only mean to bind this feature to the spec without
mentioning implementation specific stuff like proxies. That's why the
javadoc and text for this new section lack clarity. In other word we lack a
simple name for instances on which "methods invocation" are "business
methods invocation".

Antoine

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:58 PM Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:

> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Hello Antoine,
> >
> >
> >concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a
> proxying adding spec features over invocations) which is less "cglib-like"
> than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the list
> InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business method
> anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very useful to
> go that deep in the naming I think.
> >
> >
> >
> >Romain Manni-Bucau
> >@rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
> >
> >2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net
> >:
> >
> >Hi all,
> >>
> >>
> >>In my last review for CDI-580 (https://github.com/cdi-spec/
> cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec doc
> following various feedback.
> >>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with Proxy, so
> we really need to find it a new name.
> >>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
> >>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
> >>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is it
> clear from user pov?)
> >>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial name)
> >>- InterceptionEnhancer
> >>
> >>
> >>Feedback and other names are welcome.
> >>
> >>
> >>Antoine
> >>______________________________ _________________
> >>cdi-dev mailing list
> >>cdi-dev@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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdi-dev mailing list
> >cdi-dev@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.
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/efa4663c/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
       <CACLE=7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>:

> +1 for InterceptionFactory as well. I change my PR with this name.
>
> Romain, for the record, mentioning "business method invocation" and
> paragraph 7.2 is the only mean to bind this feature to the spec without
> mentioning implementation specific stuff like proxies. That's why the
> javadoc and text for this new section lack clarity. In other word we lack a
> simple name for instances on which "methods invocation" are "business
> methods invocation".
>
>
Agree and it fits the spec but since EJB I never heard any developer (not
developping weld or openwebbeans) using this term so for the API it would
be rude IMHO - was the point, nothing more.


> Antoine
>
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:58 PM Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hello Antoine,
>> >
>> >
>> >concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a
>> proxying adding spec features over invocations) which is less "cglib-like"
>> than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the list
>> InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business method
>> anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very useful to
>> go that deep in the naming I think.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >@rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
>> >
>> >2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
>> antoine@sabot-durand.net>:
>> >
>> >Hi all,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>In my last review for CDI-580 (https://github.com/cdi-spec/
>> cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec doc
>> following various feedback.
>> >>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with Proxy, so
>> we really need to find it a new name.
>> >>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
>> >>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
>> >>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is it
>> clear from user pov?)
>> >>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial name)
>> >>- InterceptionEnhancer
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Feedback and other names are welcome.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Antoine
>> >>______________________________ _________________
>> >>cdi-dev mailing list
>> >>cdi-dev@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.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >cdi-dev mailing list
>> >cdi-dev@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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/c6e8a845/attachment.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@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.

End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 72, Issue 5
**************************************

NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@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.
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all physical and electronic copies. Thank you. _______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@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.

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU