7:39 p.m.
Hi folks, here's the latest, incorporating:
* New name: Java Contexts and Dependency Injection
* Repackaging
* Aggregated namespages 9.2 (please review!)
* Standard schema location 9.3 (please review!)
* Notes regarding open issues in appendix A, chapter 3 and chapter 9
I still need to incorporate Mike's changes to chapter 1.
I will submit this spec to the JCP in about 12 hours from now!
Please let me know ASAP of any problems!
Thanks.
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
9:16 p.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
OK, here's a new draft that incorporates Mike's feedback (more or
less) and some reorg.
Please ignore the previous draft and review this one. This is more or
less what I'll be submitting.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
Hi folks, here's the latest, incorporating:
* New name: Java Contexts and Dependency Injection
* Repackaging
* Aggregated namespages 9.2 (please review!)
* Standard schema location 9.3 (please review!)
* Notes regarding open issues in appendix A, chapter 3 and chapter 9
I still need to incorporate Mike's changes to chapter 1.
I will submit this spec to the JCP in about 12 hours from now!
Please let me know ASAP of any problems!
Thanks.
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
9:53 p.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
I noticed @Model isn't in the packaging section.
If we do keep it (I think it's worth keeping, but I won't cry if we don't),
I suggest it go in javax.annotation.
My reasoning: the built-in ScopeTypes are packaged with ScopeType, the
built-in DeploymentTypes are packaged with @DeploymentType, and the built-in
BindingTypes are packaged with @BindingType. So it would be consistent to
package @Model, a built-in Stereotype, with @Stereotype.
On the other hand, @Interceptor and @Decorator are also Stereotypes, and
they're not packaged with @Stereotype. But they're special, so I don't mind
them breaking this pattern.
-Matt
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
OK, here's a new draft that incorporates Mike's feedback
(more or
less) and some reorg.
Please ignore the previous draft and review this one. This is more or
less what I'll be submitting.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> Hi folks, here's the latest, incorporating:
>
> * New name: Java Contexts and Dependency Injection
> * Repackaging
> * Aggregated namespages 9.2 (please review!)
> * Standard schema location 9.3 (please review!)
> * Notes regarding open issues in appendix A, chapter 3 and chapter 9
>
> I still need to incorporate Mike's changes to chapter 1.
>
> I will submit this spec to the JCP in about 12 hours from now!
>
> Please let me know ASAP of any problems!
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king(a)gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
_______________________________________________
webbeans-dev mailing list
webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/webbeans-dev
11:48 p.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
The term "webbeans" occurs a dozen or so times, either as part of an
outdated package name or as the XML root element in an example.
I like the aggregated namespaces (9.2) addition; I can imagine it being
handy, especially for people that like deep, skinny package hierarchies.
One potential collision in the urn:java:ee namespace is Timer
(java.util.Timer vs java.ejb.Timer). People can import "urn:java:javax.ejb"
as a separate namespace and use <ejb:Timer>, to get around this, right?
I don't know enough about schema resolution to comment on 9.3, though it
looks pretty reasonable to me.
The intro looks fine.
-Matt
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
OK, here's a new draft that incorporates Mike's feedback
(more or
less) and some reorg.
Please ignore the previous draft and review this one. This is more or
less what I'll be submitting.
1:31 a.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Matt Drees <matt.drees(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One potential collision in the urn:java:ee namespace is Timer
(java.util.Timer vs java.ejb.Timer). People can import "urn:java:javax.ejb"
as a separate namespace and use <ejb:Timer>, to get around this, right?
Right. And I don't know of any really good reasons to want to use
either type in the XML.
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
1:44 a.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Matt Drees <matt.drees(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The term "webbeans" occurs a dozen or so times, either as
part of an
outdated package name or as the XML root element in an example.
Ooops, fixed in the attached draft!
What happens when you work on things at 3AM...
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
8:02 a.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
Folks, here's the latest. I've changed "implementation class" ->
"bean
class" everywhere for consistency with the language used in the EJB
spec.
8:31 a.m.
New subject: [webbeans-dev] Re: New draft for review
OK, and finally I've changed "child container" -> "activity",
to
better reflect the usecase.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Gavin King <gavin(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
Folks, here's the latest. I've changed "implementation
class" -> "bean
class" everywhere for consistency with the language used in the EJB
spec.
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org
1:49 p.m.
I have some questions about this new name and possibly new direction,
1)
what will be relation of JSR-299 to dependency injection containers like
Spring and Guice?
is this spec going to standardize some aspects of them?
is it going to compete with them?
2)
if answer is yes to any of the above questions,
can parts of JSR-299 be supported on J2SE (Desktop) Environment too?
Arash Rajaeeyan
8:08 a.m.
In terms of the JSR-299 RI, we will support integration with Spring,
and probably Guice.
JSR-299 also supports SE+Embedded EJB 3.1 container (so of course the
RI will do). We may also look at supporting SE standalone - a member
of the community is working on this.
On 24 Jan 2009, at 19:49, Arash Rajaeeyan wrote:
I have some questions about this new name and possibly new
direction,
1)
what will be relation of JSR-299 to dependency injection containers
like Spring and Guice?
is this spec going to standardize some aspects of them?
is it going to compete with them?
2)
if answer is yes to any of the above questions,
can parts of JSR-299 be supported on J2SE (Desktop) Environment too?
Arash Rajaeeyan
_______________________________________________
webbeans-dev mailing list
webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/webbeans-dev
5798
days inactive
5802
days old
9 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Arash Rajaeeyan -
Gavin King -
Matt Drees -
Pete Muir