Hi guys, find attached feedback from a workshop participant. He would like to have web-inf parameters which can be set programmatically or evaluated via EL (and point to an application scoped bean, I would say). Do we already plan to support this? (for me, EL evaluation seems to be the way to go, but are there any issues with timing here? will we need to evaluate params before the basic setup for doing this is there?) If this can not make it in the spec, Ryan, Leonardo, can we think about supporting this in the implementations? best regards, Martin ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Heinz HUBER <hhuber(a)racon-linz.at&gt; Date: 2010/3/24 Subject: Dynamisches Einschalten Development Mode To: martin(a)marinschek.com Hallo Hr Marinschek, wie heute kurz besprochen, wäre es interessant, wenn man den Deveolpment Mode und ähnliche Features (zB Pretty Html) dynamisch steuern könnte. Bei uns die Anforderung an die Entwicklung, dass daselbe EAR (respektive WAR) in Test und Produktion eingesetzt sein muss. Zur Sicherheit sind daher diese Einstellungen im web.xml alle deaktiviert. Jetzt wäre es allerdings schön, wenn man diese in Test (entweder generell oder bei Bedarf) aktivieren könnte. Wobei hier eine Steuerung auf Basis VM-Variablen natürlich ausreichend ist. Bei dem Termin heute kam dafür die Idee, EL für diese Settings zu erlauben. Wäre interessant, wenn irgendeine Steuerungsmöglichkeit in den Standeard aufgenommen würde. Freundliche Grüße Mag. Heinz HUBER Software-Entwicklung dezentrale Systeme RACON Software GmbH A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80 Tel: +43 732 6929 1664 Fax: +43 732 6929 1488 mailto:hhuber@racon-linz.at http://www.racon-linz.at RACON Software Gesellschaft m.b.H., A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80, FN 86804d, Landesgericht Linz Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit o.a. Absender via e-mail dient ausschließlich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschäftliche Erklärungen dürfen über dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden. Correspondence with a.m. sender via e-mail is only for information purposes. This medium is not to be used for the exchange of legally-binding communications.

>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:03:08 -0500, Andy Schwartz <andy.schwartz(a)oracle.com&gt; said:

>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:07:13 -0500, "Lincoln Baxter, III" <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com&gt; said:

Hi Ganesh, I am not sure this deals with the same thing. The old mail deals with one context parameter, which decides if we are in development mode or not. The thing I suggested above is have every configuration parameter optionally be an el-expression, so that everything is configurable by however the user wants to configure it. The later would be a lot more fine-grained than the first. best regards, Martin On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ganesh <ganesh(a)j4fry.org&gt; wrote: > Hi Martin, > > We had a long thread on this in January. I'm including below the last > message of Ed on this issue. > > Best regards, > Ganesh > > Martin Marinschek schrieb: >> >> Hi guys, >> >> find attached feedback from a workshop participant. He would like to >> have web-inf parameters which can be set programmatically or evaluated >> via EL (and point to an application scoped bean, I would say). Do we >> already plan to support this? (for me, EL evaluation seems to be the >> way to go, but are there any issues with timing here? will we need to >> evaluate params before the basic setup for doing this is there?) >> >> If this can not make it in the spec, Ryan, Leonardo, can we think >> about supporting this in the implementations? >> >> best regards, >> >> Martin >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Heinz HUBER <hhuber(a)racon-linz.at&gt; >> Date: 2010/3/24 >> Subject: Dynamisches Einschalten Development Mode >> To: martin(a)marinschek.com >> >> >> >> Hallo Hr Marinschek, >> >> wie heute kurz besprochen, wäre es interessant, wenn man den >> Deveolpment Mode und ähnliche Features (zB Pretty Html) dynamisch >> steuern könnte. >> Bei uns die Anforderung an die Entwicklung, dass daselbe EAR >> (respektive WAR) in Test und Produktion eingesetzt sein muss. >> Zur Sicherheit sind daher diese Einstellungen im web.xml alle deaktiviert. >> >> Jetzt wäre es allerdings schön, wenn man diese in Test (entweder >> generell oder bei Bedarf) aktivieren könnte. Wobei hier eine Steuerung >> auf Basis VM-Variablen natürlich ausreichend ist. >> Bei dem Termin heute kam dafür die Idee, EL für diese Settings zu >> erlauben. >> Wäre interessant, wenn irgendeine Steuerungsmöglichkeit in den >> Standeard aufgenommen würde. >> >> Freundliche Grüße >> Mag. Heinz HUBER >> >> Software-Entwicklung dezentrale Systeme >> RACON Software GmbH >> A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80 >> Tel: +43 732 6929 1664 >> Fax: +43 732 6929 1488 >> mailto:hhuber@racon-linz.at >> http://www.racon-linz.at >> RACON Software Gesellschaft m.b.H., A-4021 Linz, Goethestraße 80, FN >> 86804d, Landesgericht Linz >> >> >> >> >> Der Austausch von Nachrichten mit o.a. Absender via e-mail dient >> ausschließlich Informationszwecken. Rechtsgeschäftliche Erklärungen >> dürfen über dieses Medium nicht ausgetauscht werden. >> >> Correspondence with a.m. sender via e-mail is only for information >> purposes. This medium is not to be used for the exchange of >> legally-binding communications. >> >> >> >> > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Betreff: Re: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2next] PROJECT_STAGE system property > configuration > Datum: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:43:23 -0800 > Von: Ed Burns <Ed.Burns(a)Sun.COM&gt; > Antwort an: jsr-314-open(a)jcp.org > An: jsr-314-open(a)jcp.org > Referenzen: <a3f2f0581001031245q1015dd3aj9c38974868584aff(a)mail.gmail.com > > <4B441C89.60507(a)horstmann.com&gt; <19268.52433.349823.315935(a)sun.com&gt; > <4B44E401.3020205(a)horstmann.com&gt; <19276.57985.963365.57446(a)sun.com&gt; > <4B4DD7CF.1090505(a)horstmann.com&gt; <4B4F5E6E.50401(a)oracle.com&gt; > <4B4F718F.2070500(a)horstmann.com&gt; <4B4F7B5A.90101(a)oracle.com&gt; > <4B54822D.7000108(a)horstmann.com&gt; > <a3f2f0581001181046n2b6dd445g457837ad8bde6396(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; > <4B54C194.9050203(a)oracle.com&gt; <19286.9912.390042.837832(a)sun.com&gt; > <4B562C1C.5060808(a)oracle.com&gt; > >>>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:03:08 -0500, Andy Schwartz >>>>>> <andy.schwartz(a)oracle.com&gt; said: > > AS> Personally I don't understand the nature of the objection. In some case > AS> fine-grained (application-specific) control is desired. We have AS> > addressed this case via the context parameter. There seems to be AS> > general agreement in our EG that a system-level property would also be AS> > beneficial and in particular would improve the ease of use of this AS> > feature for development-time scenarios (ie. no need for a web.xml or AS> > JNDI config). Not sure why we need to choose one approach vs. the AS> > other. Both serve a purpose. > > EB> In fact, I'm on the phone with Bill Shannon, Roberto Chinnici, Rajiv > EB> Mordani, and the Sun EE architects right now for our weekly meeting. I > EB> have requested a timeslot to bring this up (again) there. I'm glad I'm > EB> on the phone because otherwise, I might get tomatoes thrown in my face. > > AS> Wow, sounds harsh. I guess I am missing why this is so > controversial. > > I brought this issue to the Sun JavaEE Architecture meeting on Tuesday > 19 January 2010. This meeting happens mostly weekly and is where the > Sun EE Spec leads coordinate efforts to drive JavaEE spec efforts to > completion. The technical leadership at this meeting includes Bill > Shannon, Sun Distinguised Engineer and past JavaEE spec lead, and > Roberto Chinnici JavaEE 6 spec lead. > > I brought up two issues regarding ProjectStage > > 1. revive the drive to expose ProjectStage to lower level technologies > in EE. > > 2. have a System property to set the ProjectStage. > > For 1), the following questions were raised: > > * What specific use-cases exist for having ProjectStage at the servlet > level? If the Servlet EG reviewed the proposal and ultimately > rejected it, why bring it up again? > > * What about Gavin King's "alternatives" proposal? > > Pete Muir has clarified at this meeting that the "alternatives" > proposal from Gavin did not make it into CDI in such a way as to be > appropriate for our needs in the ProjectStage feature. > > For 2), the following points were raised: > > * There are no other System Properties in all of EE. Why do we need one > now? > > * Why, specifically, does this system property need to be a part of the > portable programming model? > > I voiced that it's useful in cases like mvn jetty run, or mvn tomcat > run. Bill countered that such usages are already container specific, > so it would best be addressed with a container specific configuration. > > In conclusion, I think we should close this spec issue and handle the > System Property at the impl level. I have opened issue 1539 for this > case. I will send a separate email regarding this issue. > >>>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:07:13 -0500, "Lincoln Baxter, III" >>>>>> <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com&gt; said: > > LB> We should also probably decide and state that configuration defined in > LB> web.xml will override the system property.. or visa versa. Though I > think > LB> the former allows more fine grained control. > > LB> I am in favor of the System property overriding web.xml. I don't think > it > LB> makes sense otherwise. > > I agree also. > > DA> For the implementations, it might be a good idea to borrow the log > message > DA> the Wicket uses when running in development mode. > > DA> ******************************************************************** > DA> *** WARNING: JavaServer Faces is running in DEVELOPMENT mode. *** > DA> *** ^^^^^^^^^^^ *** > DA> *** Do NOT deploy to your live server(s) without changing this. *** > DA> *** See Application#getProjectStage() for more information. *** > DA> ******************************************************************** > > Yes, I've added that to the issue. > > > Ed > -- > | ed.burns(a)sun.com | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640 > | homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/ > > > -- > "There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe there are two > kinds of people and those who don't." > — Robert Benchley > -- > "There are two kinds of people in the world, those who believe there are two > kinds of people and those who don't." > — Robert Benchley > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Werner Punz <werner.punz(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > Isn´t this all the same domain as the dynamic configuration we have been > discussing in a different thread. +1 either way. The EL would have to not depend on any request objects (of course)...but sure. I think we've had this style of config in Seam for quite some time, proving that the strategy works. We just never had the support in web.xml. -Dan -- Dan Allen Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action Registered Linux User #231597 http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen