2:30 p.m.
+1 for InterceptionFactory, too.
It sounds simpler.
Werner
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)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(a)yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)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(a)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(a)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(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.
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)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(a)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(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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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.
> >
> >
>
-------------- 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(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.
com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau(a)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(a)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(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.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
-------------- 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(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.
End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 72, Issue 5
**************************************
2:35 p.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
If the only use case is for inceptors, I agree to InterceptionFactory.
________________________________
From: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org> on behalf of
Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)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<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>>
wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>,
Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine@sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<421014798.1728352.1478537884045@mail.yahoo.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>, Romain
Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw@mail.gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
LieGrue,
strub
On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine@sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg@mail.gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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.
6:04 p.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:38 PM John Ament <john.ament(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org>
on behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)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(a)yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)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(a)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(a)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(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.
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=
u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)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(a)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(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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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.
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/efa4663c/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=
7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau(a)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(a)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(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.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/c6e8a845/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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.
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(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.
6:06 p.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
________________________________
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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<mailto: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<mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
<cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>> on
behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>>
wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>,
Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine@sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<421014798.1728352.1478537884045@mail.yahoo.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>, Romain
Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw@mail.gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
LieGrue,
strub
On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine@sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg@mail.gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org<mailto: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<mailto: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.
11:41 a.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev
<cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Date: 08/11/2016 17:17
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org> on
behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)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(a)yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=
u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)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"
doc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/efa4663c/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=
7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/c6e8a845/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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.
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(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.
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(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.
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
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(a)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(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.
>
_______________________________________________
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.
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(a)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 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(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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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.
> >
> :
+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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)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(a)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(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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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.
>> >
>> >
>
12:10 p.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
Small correction: InterceptionConfigurator is what I suggested (not
InterceptorConfigurator).
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
To: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com Cc:
cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Date:
14/11/2016 10:43
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev
<cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Date: 08/11/2016 17:17
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org> on
behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)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(a)yahoo.de Subject:
Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net Cc:
cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
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.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net Subject:
Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com Cc: cdi-dev
<cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> LieGrue,
> strub
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau
<
> rmannibucau(a)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"
> > >
>Romain Manni-Bucau
> >@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
> > >2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
antoine(a)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
> > > >>Feedback and other names are welcome.
> > > > > >>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
> > > >_______________________________________________
> >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.
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/efa4663c/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com Subject:
Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net Cc:
cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Message-ID:
<CACLE=7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
> 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(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> > >> LieGrue,
>> strub
> > > >>
On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau(a)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"
>> >> >>
>Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
>> >> >2016-11-07 15:44
GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
>> antoine(a)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
>> > >> >>Feedback and other names are welcome.
>> > >> > >> >>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
>> >> >>
>_______________________________________________
>> >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.
>> >> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/c6e8a845/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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.
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(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.
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(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.
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
_______________________________________________
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.
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
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(a)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(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.
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.
> :
> 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
> > 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.
> >:
> +1 for InterceptionFactory as well. I change my PR with this name.
> 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.
>> :
>> > 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
>> >> 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.
>> >
11:21 a.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
Maybe we could switch back to "wrapper", i.e. something like
InterceptionWrapperFactory so that it's clear that the final object is
actually just a wrapper of the original instance that handles interception.
Martin
Dne 14.11.2016 v 12:10 Emily Jiang napsal(a):
> Small correction: *InterceptionConfigurator *is what I suggested (not
> InterceptorConfigurator).
>
> 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(a)uk.ibm.com
> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
>
>
>
>
> From: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
> To: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Date: 14/11/2016 10:43
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
> InterceptorProxyFactory
> Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> 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(a)uk.ibm.com
> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
>
>
>
>
> From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev
> <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Date: 08/11/2016 17:17
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
> Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *
> From:* Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)spartasystems.com_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
> <mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org><_cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org_
> <mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>> on behalf of Werner Keil
> <_werner.keil(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
> <mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>> wrote:
> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> _cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
> <mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> _cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)yahoo.de_ <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
> To: Romain Manni-Bucau <_rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_
> <mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
> <_antoine(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
> Cc: cdi-dev <_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> Message-ID: <_421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)mail.yahoo.com_
> <mailto: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(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_
> <mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
> To: Mark Struberg <_struberg(a)yahoo.de_ <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>,
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> <_rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_ <mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>
> Cc: cdi-dev <_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> Message-ID:
>
> <CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=_u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)mail.gmail.com_
> <mailto: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(a)yahoo.de_
> <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
>
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> _rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
11:53 p.m.
New subject: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
InterceptionWrapperFactory sounds better than the InterceptionFactory.
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com To:
Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Date:
15/11/2016 10:22
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
Maybe we could switch back to "wrapper", i.e. something like
InterceptionWrapperFactory so that it's clear that the final object is
actually just a wrapper of the original instance that handles
interception.
Martin
Dne 14.11.2016 v 12:10 Emily Jiang napsal(a):
--
Martin Kouba
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Czech Republic
_______________________________________________
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.
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
Small correction: *InterceptionConfigurator *is what I suggested
(not
InterceptorConfigurator).
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
To: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com Cc:
cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Date:
14/11/2016 10:43
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com To:
Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev
<cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Date: 08/11/2016 17:17
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
From:* Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)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(a)spartasystems.com_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<_cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>> on behalf of Werner Keil
<_werner.keil(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
_cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org_ <
mailto: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(a)yahoo.de_ <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <_rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_
<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com>>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<_antoine(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net> Cc: cdi-dev <_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <_421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)mail.yahoo.com_
<mailto: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(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net> Subject:
Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <_struberg(a)yahoo.de_ <mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>>,
Romain Manni-Bucau
<_rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_ <mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com> Cc: cdi-dev <_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_
<mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=_u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)mail.gmail.com_
<mailto: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(a)yahoo.de_
<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> LieGrue,
> strub
> On
Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> _rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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/a...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <_rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_
<mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com> Subject:
Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <_antoine(a)sabot-durand.net_
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net> Cc:
cdi-dev <_cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org> Message-ID:
<CACLE=_7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.com_
<mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)yahoo.de_
<mailto:struberg@yahoo.de>> wrote:
>> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> > >> LieGrue,
>> strub
> > > >>
On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> _rmannibucau(a)gmail.com_ <mailto: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(a)sabot-durand.net_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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/a...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list_
__cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org_ <mailto: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(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.
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_______________________________________________
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.
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
_______________________________________________
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.
2785
days inactive
2793
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Antoine Sabot-Durand -
Emily Jiang -
John Ament -
Martin Kouba -
Werner Keil