9:58 a.m.
Hello,
How about removing the "ear exclusion" line
(https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly-core/pull/1317/files#diff-9ed4135f0f37...)
and keeping the rule of not adding the Service Activator files in the parent modules of
the ones where the Service Activator classes are included? That means closing
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-1234 and keeping
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-1235.
Regards,
Panagiotis
----- Original Message -----
From: "David M. Lloyd" <david.lloyd(a)redhat.com>
To: "Stuart Douglas" <sdouglas(a)redhat.com>, "Brian Stansberry"
<brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Jason T. Greene" <jason.greene(a)redhat.com>, "Panagiotis
Sotiropoulos" <psotirop(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 3:15:32 PM
Subject: Re: Could a wildlfy jira be reviewed, if possible?
True but this is not ideal because instantiating the activator might
have side-effects. I think looking in VFS is the right way to do this.
On 06/13/2016 07:11 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
I guess there is a slightly more hacky way to approach this where
you
just ensure that the resulting ServiceActivator's ClassLoader is the
same as the module class loader, although this will result in
ServiceActivators being instantiated multiple times but then not
actually used.
Stuart
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Firstly the PR itself is crap, just checking if the deployment name
> ends with ".ear" is not the correct way to do things, and it does not
> even fix the underlying problem (which is caused by ServiceActivator
> files being visible from multiple deployments).
>
> I think your interpretation of what the semantics should be is
> correct. I think the only real way to implement this however is to
> change from using Module.loadServices() to using VFS based discovery
> to get more control over the loading process.
>
> Stuart
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Brian Stansberry
> <brian.stansberry(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi David, Jason, Stuart:
>>
>> We need to decide how to deal with these PRs. AIUI that means deciding what
>> are the supported semantics and then what changes are needed to meet those.
>>
>> IMO it seems like the semantics should be simple. For each
>> META-INF/services/org.jboss.msc.service.ServiceActivator file in the overall
>> deployment, the service gets activated once and only once. If there are 2
>> such files that install the same service, we execute both, there's a
>> DuplicateServiceException, and the user fixes their deployment.
>>
>> On 6/13/16 8:41 AM, Panagiotis Sotiropoulos wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Mr Brian,
>>>
>>> Could you please review https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-1235,
>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFCORE-1234 (they have the same PR). It is
>>> related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286272 (which is
>>> related to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1292044 (VERIFIED)).
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Panagiotis Sotiropoulos
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Brian Stansberry
>> Senior Principal Software Engineer
>> JBoss by Red Hat
--
- DML