2:41 p.m.
Hi folks,
I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a big
deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider
class.
One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear the
name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and <projectName>Drop.ddl. I
wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
Thanks,
Ivan
2:52 p.m.
Hey Ivan,
You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a parameter, but
remember that it may be null.
However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the DDL file in order to
keep it simple and easier to find.
Best Regards,
George Gastaldi
Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
Hi folks,
I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a big deal,
it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear the name of the
project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and <projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there
a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
Thanks,
Ivan
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
2:58 p.m.
Thanks, George!
As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do it
as you proposed: without the project name.
Cheers,
Ivan
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
Hey Ivan,
You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a
parameter, but remember that it may be null.
However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the DDL
file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
Best Regards,
George Gastaldi
Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
escreveu:
Hi folks,
I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a
big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider
class.
One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear
the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and <projectName>Drop.ddl.
I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
Thanks,
Ivan
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
3 p.m.
However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps it's wise to
change the interface definition now than later. :)
Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
Thanks, George!
As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do it as you
proposed: without the project name.
Cheers,
Ivan
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> Hey Ivan,
> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a parameter,
but remember that it may be null.
>
> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the DDL file in
order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> George Gastaldi
>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a big
deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>
>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear the name
of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and <projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is
there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ivan
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:02 p.m.
OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object
to pollute the interface if it's used in just one of the implementations?
And we can even do without it, as you noted.
When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear,
perhaps
it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
escreveu:
Thanks, George!
As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do it
as you proposed: without the project name.
Cheers,
Ivan
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
> Hey Ivan,
> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a
> parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>
> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the DDL
> file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> George Gastaldi
>
> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a
> big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider
> class.
>
> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear
> the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl.
> I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
>
> Thanks,
> Ivan
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:06 p.m.
I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to be reused as
a singleton without aby thread issues.
Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA for it?
Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It produces the content
of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object to pollute the interface if it's
used in just one of the implementations? And we can even do without it, as you noted.
When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was thinking of somehow
injecting the project, not changing the interface.
But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps it's wise
to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>
>> Thanks, George!
>>
>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do it as you
proposed: without the project name.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>> Hey Ivan,
>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a
parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>
>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the DDL
file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> George Gastaldi
>>>
>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not
a big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>
>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear
the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and <projectName>Drop.ddl. I
wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ivan
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:17 p.m.
I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through
the Maven facet? Do we always have that on a project?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the
object to
be reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA
for it?
Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
escreveu:
OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object
to pollute the interface if it's used in just one of the implementations?
And we can even do without it, as you noted.
When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
> it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>
> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> Thanks, George!
>
> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do it
> as you proposed: without the project name.
>
> Cheers,
> Ivan
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> Hey Ivan,
>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as a
>> parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>
>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the
>> DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> George Gastaldi
>>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a
>> big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider
>> class.
>>
>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear
>> the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl.
>> I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ivan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:21 p.m.
Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it
uses the Maven facet under the hood.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>wrote:
I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through
the Maven facet? Do we always have that on a project?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to
> be reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>
> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA
> for it?
>
> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
> produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object
> to pollute the interface if it's used in just one of the implementations?
> And we can even do without it, as you noted.
>
> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
> thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>
> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
>> it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> Thanks, George!
>>
>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do
>> it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Ivan,
>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as
>>> a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>
>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the
>>> DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> George Gastaldi
>>>
>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a
>>> big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the
JavaEEDefaultProvider
>>> class.
>>>
>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should bear
>>> the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl.
>>> I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the persistence provider?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
4:24 p.m.
Yes, MetadataFacet is always available. Use it to retrieve the project name.
Em 25/01/2014, às 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it uses the Maven
facet under the hood.
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
>
> BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through the Maven
facet? Do we always have that on a project?
>
>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to be
reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>>
>> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA for it?
>>
>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>
>>
>>> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It produces
the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object to pollute the interface
if it's used in just one of the implementations? And we can even do without it, as you
noted.
>>>
>>> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>>>
>>> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big
deal.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>>>
>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, George!
>>>>>
>>>>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would
do it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Ivan,
>>>>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the
project as a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to
the DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> George Gastaldi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443.
It's not a big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the
JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts
should bear the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the
persistence provider?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:25 p.m.
And yes, it was possible to do that in Forge 1. Shouldn't be too hard to implemebt
though. All you need to do is implement UIContextListener and listen for UIContext started
events :)
Em 25/01/2014, às 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it uses the Maven
facet under the hood.
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
>
> BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through the Maven
facet? Do we always have that on a project?
>
>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to be
reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>>
>> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA for it?
>>
>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>
>>
>>> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It produces
the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object to pollute the interface
if it's used in just one of the implementations? And we can even do without it, as you
noted.
>>>
>>> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>>>
>>> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big
deal.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>>>
>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, George!
>>>>>
>>>>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would
do it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Ivan,
>>>>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the
project as a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to
the DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> George Gastaldi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443.
It's not a big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to the
JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts
should bear the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the
persistence provider?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
4:57 p.m.
Marking as WON'T FIX since the concept of a current project no longer exists and
it's retrievable via AbstractProjectCommand
Posted by forums
Original post: https://community.jboss.org/message/854825#854825
9:08 p.m.
I don't think Project should be injectable in Forge 2. Doesn't make sense
with the new design. There is no "current project". Not sure we will have
such a concept other than what the UISelection provides (as we have done in
the AbstractProjectCommand :)
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
And yes, it was possible to do that in Forge 1. Shouldn't be too
hard to
implemebt though. All you need to do is implement UIContextListener and
listen for UIContext started events :)
Em 25/01/2014, às 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
escreveu:
Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it
uses the Maven facet under the hood.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov <
ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
>
> BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through
> the Maven facet? Do we always have that on a project?
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object to
>> be reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>>
>> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA
>> for it?
>>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>> escreveu:
>>
>> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
>> produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object
>> to pollute the interface if it's used in just one of the implementations?
>> And we can even do without it, as you noted.
>>
>> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
>> thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>>
>> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a big deal.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>>
>>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear, perhaps
>>> it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>>
>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> Thanks, George!
>>>
>>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I would do
>>> it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Ivan,
>>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass the project as
>>>> a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>>
>>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the projectName to the
>>>> DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> George Gastaldi
>>>>
>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com>
>>>> escreveu:
>>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> I am working on https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not
>>>> a big deal, it's a matter of adding a few lines to
>>>> the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>
>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop scripts should
>>>> bear the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
>>>> <projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow
to the
>>>> persistence provider?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ivan
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
9:29 p.m.
Yes, however it should work in a @CommandScoped object.
My pull request is not working like this because I can't ensure that the
CommandScopedContext (that implements UIContextListener) is executed before others.
I have created another JIRA to support ordering in the Furnace's Imported object.
Em 26/01/2014, às 01:09, "Lincoln Baxter, III"
<lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
I don't think Project should be injectable in Forge 2. Doesn't make sense with
the new design. There is no "current project". Not sure we will have such a
concept other than what the UISelection provides (as we have done in the
AbstractProjectCommand :)
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, George Gastaldi <ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> And yes, it was possible to do that in Forge 1. Shouldn't be too hard to
implemebt though. All you need to do is implement UIContextListener and listen for
UIContext started events :)
>
>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>
>> Ah, now I found this MetadataFacet. Is it always available? I see that it uses
the Maven facet under the hood.
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Ivan St. Ivanov
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think it was possible to do that in Forge 1?
>>>
>>> BTW, how do you get a project name from the Project object? Is it through the
Maven facet? Do we always have that on a project?
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:06 AM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> I'd rather pass as a param than injecting tbh. This allows the object
to be reused as a singleton without aby thread issues.
>>>>
>>>> Btw Project is not yet available for injection. Should we create a JIRA
for it?
>>>>
>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> OK, but what does the JavaEEDefaultProvider::configure method do? It
produces the content of persistence.xml. Why would you need Project object to pollute the
interface if it's used in just one of the implementations? And we can even do without
it, as you noted.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I asked this question in the first message of this thread, I was
thinking of somehow injecting the project, not changing the interface.
>>>>>
>>>>> But if you say it's reasonable, I will do that, it's not a
big deal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> However since we are on CR1, and other requirements may appear,
perhaps it's wise to change the interface definition now than later. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, George!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I am not really keen to change the interface definition, I
would do it as you proposed: without the project name.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:52 PM, George Gastaldi
<ggastald(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey Ivan,
>>>>>>>> You could change the configure method signature to pass
the project as a parameter, but remember that it may be null.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I think it would be better to not add the
projectName to the DDL file in order to keep it simple and easier to find.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> George Gastaldi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Em 25/01/2014, às 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov"
<ivan.st.ivanov(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am working on
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-1443. It's not a big deal, it's a matter of
adding a few lines to the JavaEEDefaultProvider class.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One of the requirements is that the create and drop
scripts should bear the name of the project: <projectName>Creade.ddl and
<projectName>Drop.ddl. I wonder is there a way to pass that somehow to the
persistence provider?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
3983
days inactive
3983
days old
12 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
forge-dev＠lists.jboss.org -
George Gastaldi -
Ivan St. Ivanov -
Lincoln Baxter, III