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, ās 20:21, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov@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@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@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, ās 20:02, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov@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@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, ās 18:58, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov@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@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, ās 18:42, "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov@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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev

_______________________________________________
forge-dev mailing list
forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev