[cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a parameter in @Observes
Werner Keil
werner.keil at gmail.com
Tue Oct 28 11:17:37 EDT 2014
Yep, if SE 8 should switch to a new MR of 250, then it would spare EE 8 the
Trouble and redundancy (assuming none of the other annotations changed at
all between 1.1 and 1.2, there would be no clash, otherwise you could get a
Version you don't expect depending on which one's available on the relevant
classpath[?])
If it doesn't, then both EE 8 and CDI "light" would need to use the latest
MR which would then of course contain the necessary enhancement, so
especially if we only care about @Priority, we're fine either way.
Cheers,
Werner
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> wrote:
> +1
>
> We are lucky that SE did _not_ yet update, so let's act now ;)
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, 28 October 2014, 13:01, Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >It seems, Java SE 8 despite released in 2014 used an OLDER version of JSR
> 250 (1.0 or 1.1 at most) than Java EE 7, where @Priority (from 1.2) is
> included.
> >
> >
> >For consistency EE 8 will certainly keep it, but as of now, one would
> have to ask SE 8 to include the new version. Since EE 8 will build on SE 8
> that seems like a conflict or at least redundancy if you have 2 identical
> annotations in the same classpath;-)
> >
> >
> >So it isn't just an issue for CDI alone, somewhere before EE 8 goes
> final, SE 8 will have to update to 1.2 or whatever is available then, so EE
> 8 can simply build on top of it instead of including a newer version of the
> same API in a pre-Jigsaw setup where this isn't a good thing to have,
> especially not on a platform level;-)
> >
> >
> >Should the Spec Lead of 250 be able to update @Priority before SE 8 fixes
> the inconsistency, then it would solve the Problems of both CDI 2 (light)
> and the full EE 8 stack.
> >
> >
> >Werner
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:50 PM, <cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> >> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>
> >>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >> cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
> >>
> >>You can reach the person managing the list at
> >> cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org
> >>
> >>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >>than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
> >>
> >>
> >>Today's Topics:
> >>
> >> 1. Re: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding
> >> a parameter in @Observes (John D. Ament)
> >> 2. Re: cdi-dev Digest, Vol 47, Issue 13 (Werner Keil)
> >>
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>Message: 1
> >>Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 07:48:53 -0400
> >>From: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament at gmail.com>
> >>Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead
> >> of adding a parameter in @Observes
> >>To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net>
> >>Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >>Message-ID:
> >> <CAOqetn9rpHpZNUV8UfK5Bn=+0S_TgZv=
> QN2xLW79SA25p4pP9g at mail.gmail.com>
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >>
> >>-1 (vote for a param in @Observes)
> >>
> >>The reason being, it sounds like there's a lot of unknowns/gaps with
> trying
> >>to do #1. Plus only part of 250 ships with the JVM, as the rest of it
> >>comes from the EE spec:
> >>
> https://javaee-spec.java.net/nonav/javadocs/javax/annotation/Priority.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:56 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> >>antoine at sabot-durand.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
> >>>
> >>> 1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote
> +1)
> >>> pros:
> >>> - more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI
> >>> (Interceptors, decorators, Alternatives)
> >>> - more Java EE consistent
> >>>
> >>> cons:
> >>> - time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update
> to
> >>> support parameter for target)
> >>> - as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have
> to
> >>> add the jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which
> will
> >>> make it a little less light)
> >>>
> >>> 2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer
> >>> (vote -1)
> >>> pros:
> >>> - works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other
> >>> specs modification)
> >>> - avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
> >>>
> >>> cons:
> >>> - less Java EE spirit
> >>> - could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors,
> >>> Decorators and Alternatives.
> >>>
> >>> ????????????????????
> >>>
> >>> Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes
> will be
> >>> binding
> >>> How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for
> >>> parameter in @Observes)
> >>> Vote will be closed in 72 hours
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cdi-dev mailing list
> >>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >>>
> >>> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> >>> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> >>> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> >>> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >>-------------- next part --------------
> >>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/fe500398/attachment-0001.html
> >>
> >>------------------------------
> >>
> >>Message: 2
> >>Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:50:14 +0100
> >>From: Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>
> >>Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] cdi-dev Digest, Vol 47, Issue 13
> >>To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >>Message-ID:
> >> <CAAGawe2F9sw28==u28pexbMehB2V3Y=
> pvY1qS2YEZHoGmO+sFw at mail.gmail.com>
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >>
> >>Interestingly there is no @Priority in Java SE 8 see that JavaDoc:
> >>
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary.html
> >>
> >>Meaning we won't get that one via Java 8 anyway, and it shows, there
> could
> >>be flexibility to pick just the annotations you need for CDI 2 under the
> >>right circumstances, too[?]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, <cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> >>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>>
> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >>> cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
> >>>
> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >>> cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org
> >>>
> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >>> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Today's Topics:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Re: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding
> >>> a parameter in @Observes (Werner Keil)
> >>> 2. Re: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding
> >>> a parameter in @Observes (Pete Muir)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 2
> >>> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 11:43:31 +0000
> >>> From: Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead
> >>> of adding a parameter in @Observes
> >>> To: Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>
> >>> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >>> Message-ID: <A2F18F27-2750-4C0C-8CF0-BD1E50227087 at redhat.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >>>
> >>> No, it is part of the JDK - check out the packages available in your
> IDE,
> >>> or look at the Javadoc.
> >>>
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary.html
> >>> <
> >>>
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary.html
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> We can get an MR no problem, however it is critical IMO that this
> update
> >>> makes it in the JDK in a timely fashion to avoid people having to use
> the
> >>> endorsed dir to upgrade JSR-250 (Antoine mentioned you have to add it
> as a
> >>> dependency, but it?s worse - you have to add it to the endorsed dir).
> >>>
> >>> > On 28 Oct 2014, at 11:40, Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > AFAIK that is not part of the JDK, thus it should make it easier to
> ask
> >>> them for a MR, last happened about a year ago:
> >>> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250 <
> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com
> <mailto:
> >>> pmuir at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >>> > I would be +1 if we can get a commitment to update the version of
> >>> JSR-250 shipped in the JDK updated as well, otherwise -1
> >>> >
> >>> >> On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:13, Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com
> <mailto:
> >>> werner.keil at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> +1 for 1)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but
> >>> there are existing dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most
> notably
> >>> JSR-330.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under 250 matter
> at
> >>> all, if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping" libraries
> >>> proposed by Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by
> OpenJDK
> >>> architects including Mark Reinhold with the EC. So far no real
> progress on
> >>> that, but till this JSR goes final or EE 8 it could work to get
> >>> dependencies a bit lighter, too.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g.
> to
> >>> finally make use of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but
> >>> seems much easier here than e.g. bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Werner
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
> >>> <mailto:cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org>> wrote:
> >>> >> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> >>> >> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev <
> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev>
> >>> >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >>> >> cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
> >>> cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >>> >> cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
> >>> cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >>> >> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Today's Topics:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 1. Re: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
> >>> >> 2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
> >>> >> parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> >>> >> 3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> >>> >> 4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
> >>> >> 19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
> >>> >> Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine at sabot-durand.net
> <mailto:
> >>> antoine at sabot-durand.net>)
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Message: 2
> >>> >> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
> >>> >> From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net <mailto:
> >>> antoine at sabot-durand.net>>
> >>> >> Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
> >>> >> adding a parameter in @Observes
> >>> >> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> >>> >> Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763 at sabot-durand.net
> >>> <mailto:ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763 at sabot-durand.net>>
> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> >>> >>
> >>> >> To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250)
> (vote
> >>> +1)
> >>> >> pros:
> >>> >> - more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in
> CDI
> >>> (Interceptors, decorators, Alternatives)
> >>> >> - more Java EE consistent
> >>> >>
> >>> >> cons:
> >>> >> - time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be
> update
> >>> to support parameter for target)
> >>> >> - as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will
> have
> >>> to add the jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which
> >>> will make it a little less light)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an
> observer
> >>> (vote -1)
> >>> >> pros:
> >>> >> - works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for
> other
> >>> specs modification)
> >>> >> - avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler
> usage)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> cons:
> >>> >> - less Java EE spirit
> >>> >> - could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order
> Interceptors,
> >>> Decorators and Alternatives.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ????????????????????
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes
> will
> >>> be binding
> >>> >> How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or
> -1(for
> >>> parameter in @Observes)
> >>> >> Vote will be closed in 72 hours
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> cdi-dev mailing list
> >>> >> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev <
> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses
> the
> >>> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html <
> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html>). For all other ideas
> >>> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> >>> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>> URL:
> >>>
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/7a4d9ef6/attachment.html
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cdi-dev mailing list
> >>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >>>
> >>> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> >>> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> >>> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> >>> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >>>
> >>> End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 47, Issue 13
> >>> ***************************************
> >>>
> >>-------------- next part --------------
> >>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/ee9da88a/attachment.html
> >>-------------- next part --------------
> >>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> >>Name: not available
> >>Type: image/gif
> >>Size: 186 bytes
> >>Desc: not available
> >>Url :
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/ee9da88a/attachment.gif
> >>
> >>------------------------------
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>cdi-dev mailing list
> >>cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >>https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >>
> >>Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >>
> >>End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 47, Issue 14
> >>***************************************
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdi-dev mailing list
> >cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> >Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/26342b6a/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141028/26342b6a/attachment-0001.gif
More information about the cdi-dev
mailing list