----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesper Pedersen" <jesper.pedersen(a)jboss.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 4:04:40 PM
Subject: Re: [wildfly-dev] JCA service/model names a.k.a WFLY-1656
On 08/06/2013 09:29 AM, Bartosz Baranowski wrote:
> Finally I was able ( I think ) to nail the problem and forge fix. There are
> still some intermittent CI failures, but other than that CI looks clear.
> While I polish last parts it would be good to get feedback on changes,
> since impact on JCA integration is quite big.
> Fix removes all static/leaky code from ConnectorServices ( add relevant
> code to MSC service ), move away from static hashmap checks in favor of
> MSC service present/deployment/dependency and remove ability to create
> more than one activation for distinct model address.
Amazing that a patch like this can be written without asking for input
from the existing contributors for the subsystems in question.
Well, I've talked with JCA guys and I've been told that it's according to
design and it's all good. However, there is JIRA, which has been validated by
David/Carlo. Yet only feedback, from JCA team, on subject is:
- "there must be public discussion before JIRA is filed" ( JIRA is public btw
- "WontFix" without any reason ( iirc issue has been closed twice ) - so it did
not slip through fingers like a stealthy ninja, it has been ignored.
So well yeah, its amazing such patch has been created. Just to point out, such deprecatory
tone in light of above, is out of place.
And, are you even sure that the all use-cases are covered ? Like
multiple activations of the same resource adapter, and other setups that
are used in production environments. Well, asking for feedback up-front
could have helped.
Anyway, Stefano can take a look at this. If you want feedback before
that you know where to find us.
wildfly-dev mailing list