I would like to propose that we modify the name of the source directories in a seam-gen project so they better reflect how they are built rather than what classes they might contain. The current paths are: src/action src/model The src/action directory works as the hot deployable classpath when running in development mode. In production mode, they both get dumped into the same classpath. Here is the renaming I am proposing: src/action -> src/hot src/model -> src/main (or src/static) I am *not* looking for a major change here. This is just a small task that I feel would just cause less confusion. For instance, I often recommend to clients to move classes that have "solidified" out of the hot deployment directory so that they are not constantly reloaded (hence wasting build time). But currently it feels unnatural to put an action component under src/model. I would like to know if these names are okay and if, perhaps, you have a better choice for "src/main". I really don't expect objections to "src/hot", but you have a chance to speak up. -Dan -- Dan Allen Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week, it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if you feel that it did not reach my attention.

I'm happy with src/main and src/hot On 28 Sep 2008, at 09:57, Dan Allen wrote: > Btw, we will still retain the concept of action and model components. > That much does make sense. So no UI changes to JBossTools would be > necessary. > > -Dan > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: >> I would like to propose that we modify the name of the source >> directories in a seam-gen project so they better reflect how they >> are >> built rather than what classes they might contain. The current paths >> are: >> >> src/action >> src/model >> >> The src/action directory works as the hot deployable classpath when >> running in development mode. In production mode, they both get >> dumped >> into the same classpath. Here is the renaming I am proposing: >> >> src/action -> src/hot >> src/model -> src/main (or src/static) >> >> I am *not* looking for a major change here. This is just a small >> task >> that I feel would just cause less confusion. For instance, I often >> recommend to clients to move classes that have "solidified" out of >> the >> hot deployment directory so that they are not constantly reloaded >> (hence wasting build time). But currently it feels unnatural to >> put an >> action component under src/model. >> >> I would like to know if these names are okay and if, perhaps, you >> have >> a better choice for "src/main". I really don't expect objections to >> "src/hot", but you have a chance to speak up. >> >> -Dan >> >> -- >> Dan Allen >> Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action >> >> http://mojavelinux.com >> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >> >> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a >> daily >> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away >> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more >> than a week, >> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message >> was >> caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a >> message if >> you feel that it did not reach my attention. >> > > > > -- > Dan Allen > Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action > > http://mojavelinux.com > http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction > > NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a > daily > basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away > from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than > a week, > it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was > caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a > message if > you feel that it did not reach my attention. > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev _______________________________________________ seam-dev mailing list seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

Does moving solidified classes make a real performance difference? My main concern is that model classes and their dependencies can never be hot deployed, so moving to a main / hot scheme will create a whole new set of confusion On Sep 28, 2008, at 6:11, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I'm happy with src/main and src/hot > > On 28 Sep 2008, at 09:57, Dan Allen wrote: > >> Btw, we will still retain the concept of action and model components. >> That much does make sense. So no UI changes to JBossTools would be >> necessary. >> >> -Dan >> >> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> I would like to propose that we modify the name of the source >>> directories in a seam-gen project so they better reflect how they are >>> built rather than what classes they might contain. The current paths >>> are: >>> >>> src/action >>> src/model >>> >>> The src/action directory works as the hot deployable classpath when >>> running in development mode. In production mode, they both get dumped >>> into the same classpath. Here is the renaming I am proposing: >>> >>> src/action -> src/hot >>> src/model -> src/main (or src/static) >>> >>> I am *not* looking for a major change here. This is just a small task >>> that I feel would just cause less confusion. For instance, I often >>> recommend to clients to move classes that have "solidified" out of the >>> hot deployment directory so that they are not constantly reloaded >>> (hence wasting build time). But currently it feels unnatural to put an >>> action component under src/model. >>> >>> I would like to know if these names are okay and if, perhaps, you have >>> a better choice for "src/main". I really don't expect objections to >>> "src/hot", but you have a chance to speak up. >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> -- >>> Dan Allen >>> Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action >>> >>> http://mojavelinux.com >>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >>> >>> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily >>> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away >>> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a >>> week, >>> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was >>> caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message >>> if >>> you feel that it did not reach my attention. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dan Allen >> Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action >> >> http://mojavelinux.com >> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >> >> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily >> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away >> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a >> week, >> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was >> caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if >> you feel that it did not reach my attention. >> _______________________________________________ >> seam-dev mailing list >> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev > > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

Btw the goal was to get rid of this distinction as soon as a solution is found (need some work on JBoss as). The diff is more an annoyance than anything else On Sep 28, 2008, at 9:41, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Does moving solidified classes make a real performance difference? > My main concern is that model classes and their dependencies can > never be hot deployed, so moving to a main / hot scheme will create > a whole new set of confusion > > On Sep 28, 2008, at 6:11, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> I'm happy with src/main and src/hot >> >> On 28 Sep 2008, at 09:57, Dan Allen wrote: >> >>> Btw, we will still retain the concept of action and model >>> components. >>> That much does make sense. So no UI changes to JBossTools would be >>> necessary. >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Dan Allen >>> <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>> I would like to propose that we modify the name of the source >>>> directories in a seam-gen project so they better reflect how >>>> they are >>>> built rather than what classes they might contain. The current >>>> paths >>>> are: >>>> >>>> src/action >>>> src/model >>>> >>>> The src/action directory works as the hot deployable classpath >>>> when >>>> running in development mode. In production mode, they both get >>>> dumped >>>> into the same classpath. Here is the renaming I am proposing: >>>> >>>> src/action -> src/hot >>>> src/model -> src/main (or src/static) >>>> >>>> I am *not* looking for a major change here. This is just a small >>>> task >>>> that I feel would just cause less confusion. For instance, I often >>>> recommend to clients to move classes that have "solidified" out >>>> of the >>>> hot deployment directory so that they are not constantly reloaded >>>> (hence wasting build time). But currently it feels unnatural to >>>> put an >>>> action component under src/model. >>>> >>>> I would like to know if these names are okay and if, perhaps, >>>> you have >>>> a better choice for "src/main". I really don't expect objections >>>> to >>>> "src/hot", but you have a chance to speak up. >>>> >>>> -Dan >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dan Allen >>>> Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action >>>> >>>> http://mojavelinux.com >>>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >>>> >>>> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a >>>> daily >>>> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away >>>> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more >>>> than a week, >>>> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the >>>> message was >>>> caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a >>>> message if >>>> you feel that it did not reach my attention. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dan Allen >>> Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action >>> >>> http://mojavelinux.com >>> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >>> >>> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a >>> daily >>> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away >>> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more >>> than a week, >>> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message >>> was >>> caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a >>> message if >>> you feel that it did not reach my attention. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> seam-dev mailing list >>> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> seam-dev mailing list >> seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev

> IMO the distinction between model and action is orthogonal to whether to hot > deploy or not. For example, where do you put a class that must be loaded by > the wacl? Model is semantically wrong and action won't work as it is hot > deployed. Better to educate people about what can be hot deployed vs what > can't. Pete and I are in complete sync on this issue. -Dan -- Dan Allen Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week, it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if you feel that it did not reach my attention.