[cdi-dev] With the end of Java Config...
Anatole Tresch
atsticks at gmail.com
Sun Sep 7 17:32:33 EDT 2014
I would not worry about CDI regarding licensing. Just the sentence was that
Oracle does not want to have more ALv2 in addition to what is already
there. So as long as we do things within CDI, no worries, I think. For new
EE JSRs nevertheless this is a BIG issue and should be clarified by the EC!
2014-09-07 21:44 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>:
> Indeed, and with CDI 1.2 (MR) and 2.0 offering even the Spec under ALv2 as
> a dual-license, this was discussed by EC Members but both JCP EC and Oracle
> Legal/PMO seems fine with it, and CDI is already an essential building
> block to Java EE 6/7, hence used with Glassfish, too. I wasn't involved in
> these discussions, but given CDI is especially liberal and fully accepted
> by JCP formalities and license policies, I don't really see what the
> problem wss for Anatole's JSR attempt (though I know, both Oracle and other
> EC Members/companies don't always prefer this kind of licensing...;-)
>
> Werner
>
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 9:28 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, this mail has me more concerned than anything. Can you clarify this
>> ALv2 statement? AFAIK, Weld (the CDI RI) is ALv2.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Anatole Tresch <atsticks at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> unfortunately things seem quite complicated:
>>>
>>> - first of all,* similarities with Deltaspike are basically not
>>> accidental*. The concepts we developed in Credit Suisse are very
>>> similar to Deltaspike, though Deltaspike was not yet born at that time.
>>> Fortunately we ended up with a similar kind of solution.
>>> - *filtering still can be done.* My idea is to define some kind of
>>> "configuration provider", which then is dynamically asked for
>>> configuration. How the provider is internally organized, is completely
>>> transparent to CDI. This enables to have multi-layered, complex config
>>> solutions work the same (from a view point of CDI) like simple programmatic
>>> test configurations during unit tests. The config provider still can
>>> support filtering and dynamic resolution as commonly used in configuration
>>> systems. Similarly the format is basically also not fixed. Of course, would
>>> a reference implementation provide a set of functionalities, but I would
>>> definitively not define the exact configuration mechanism as part of the
>>> CDI (or even a EE config JSR). Another reason, beside complexity and time,
>>> is the fact that different companies handle, store and manage configuration
>>> differently, so a mechanism must be flexible enough to accommodate these,
>>> without adoption rate will be low. Furthermore this flexibility also keeps
>>> doors open for use cases we do not know yet.
>>> - Also we have to separate some basically *two types of
>>> configuration aspects:*
>>> - *application config *basically is injected into deployed
>>> components, but basically only can affect deployment to the extend it can
>>> be managed and injected by CDI. The basic architecture and design, how
>>> application servers to load and deploy are basically not affected. This
>>> type of configuration (mechanism) I see also as a possible addition to CDI,
>>> if we really fail to do something in another JSR. With CDI going for a more
>>> modular design, even basic configuration of CDI can be possible, given we
>>> have some kind of API, we can access during CDI initialization.
>>> - On the other side *deployment configuration *affects directly
>>> how the application server deploys the application. Configuration here
>>> would allow to define datasources, EJBs, transactional aspects, security,
>>> persistence, war and ear configurations etc. Basically everything you do as
>>> of today with some kind of XML file, or annotation. Hereby enabling more
>>> flexibility into the existing descriptors is relatively easy, but as
>>> mentioned by Mark, constraint. Adding more flexibility raises other subtle
>>> problems. Imagine a application module, e.g. a war, that defines everything
>>> it requires. There is no need to configure anything more on server side
>>> (with spring you can do this, with Java EE unfortunately not). But this has
>>> a severe consequence, it would make the application really portable in the
>>> sense, that it can be moved between different app servers (vendors) without
>>> any change (ideally). As a result commercial profits of some vendor
>>> companies may be affected. I think this is actually one of the key points,
>>> why things are getting so complicated in that area.
>>> - *Legal aspects* also were discussed. One of them is a possible
>>> legal clash of ALv2 with GPL. This is the case already within Glassfish,
>>> but one of the reasons, why ALv2 was not acceptable to Oracle's legal
>>> department. At the end we decided to use a BSD model. Even dual licensing
>>> BSD/ALv2 could theoretically be an option. If you would choose ALv2, Oracle
>>> will not include your RI into Glassfish, which is the RI for the EE
>>> Umbrella JSR, meaning your JSR will not be included into EE8. So what
>>> should we do? I don't have a good answer...
>>>
>>> So, I like to discuss configuration aspects here. Nevertheless if we
>>> decide to add config aspects, be aware that we might only (mainly) support
>>> application config, since everything else directly would impact other JSRs.
>>> And that is obviously quite similar to what Apache Deltaspike is all about
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Anatole
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-09-07 14:46 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>:
>>>
>>>> Yes, the config group also was (obviously) looking at DeltaSpikes
>>>> config mechanism as well.
>>>> There were others who wanted to go more into the 'filtering' approach
>>>> as done on WebLogic servers (though not sure who else does that as well).
>>>> You know, having all the XML configs like WEB-INF/web.xml containing
>>>> placeholders and the real values only get placed in there at deployment
>>>> time. I personally find this approach a bit limited from a technical
>>>> perspective and it already didn't work out for me when using WebLogic (what
>>>> about changing a configured value after the deployment was done? What about
>>>> security? Having passwords in web.xml, unit testing, ...).
>>>> There are of course also other approaches which all might have strong
>>>> sides and would have needed to get discussed.
>>>>
>>>> But utterly the problem seems to have been legal reasons. We even
>>>> offered to have Anatole/CS lead the EG and do the RI as an ASF project with
>>>> substantial support and participation from the JBoss, DeltaSpike and TomEE
>>>> communities.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, the time will come when we will resurrect this effort.
>>>>
>>>> LieGrue,
>>>> strub
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, 7 September 2014, 14:29, Werner Keil <
>>>> werner.keil at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep, it contains a simple but extendable notion of ProjectStage, too;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 2:19 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Anatole,
>>>>
>>>> I'm wondering if some of your configuration description falls under
>>>> what was put together in DeltaSpike?
>>>>
>>>> http://deltaspike.apache.org/configuration.html
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Anatole Tresch <atsticks at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Staging is not a question of xml or not xml (the "format" of config).
>>>> You can do staged config also using xml, or based on a database or json
>>>> config service. Staging as well as, more generally speaking, environment
>>>> dependent config is more like to select/filter the right config that
>>>> *targets *the current (runtime) environment. This might include
>>>> stages, but also many other aspects are feasible and common (server, tier,
>>>> ear, war, tenant ...). Since these aspects are per se very complex, it
>>>> might be advisable to leave them out of any spec (even a dedicated config
>>>> JSR would probably not be capable of covering these within the relatively
>>>> short EE timeframe)...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-09-05 23:30 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Jens/all,
>>>>
>>>> A sort of "staging" already was possible using CDI earlier, see
>>>> examples like this:
>>>>
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16907185/multiple-cdi-configuration-profiles-devel-beta-qa-production-in-one-war
>>>>
>>>> DeltaSpike also includes type-safe staging that goes beyond the
>>>> primitive, hard-coded JSF enum.
>>>>
>>>> If that works without XML, while still allowing flexible configuration
>>>> for different stages or to add and "inject" additional stages maybe even
>>>> on a tenant basis (for Cloud scenarios) I could see something like that
>>>> work without XML. In the Multiconf project we managed to code everything in
>>>> Python, and similar to Puppet or Chef you can configure and deploy multiple
>>>> environments with it, Java EE, Spring or Play! several of them are
>>>> configured this way and it requires no XML (where the container needs such
>>>> files, the framework generates them;-)
>>>>
>>>> Werner
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:21 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: Tools : Google Drive vs Asciidoc and Github (Anatole Tresch)
>>>> 2. Re: With the end of Java Config... (Anatole Tresch)
>>>> 3. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-456) fix Bean#getBeanClass() definition
>>>> (Anatole Tresch (JIRA))
>>>> 4. Re: With the end of Java Config... (Jens Schumann)
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Message: 4
>>>> Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 20:20:53 +0000
>>>> From: Jens Schumann <jens.schumann at openknowledge.de>
>>>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] With the end of Java Config...
>>>> To: Anatole Tresch <atsticks at gmail.com>, Antonio Goncalves
>>>> <antonio.goncalves at gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>>> Message-ID: <D02FDD99.396B9%jens.schumann at openknowledge.de>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>>>
>>>> I can confirm that this approach works very well. We are using a
>>>> similar approach a couple of years now, and I love the simplicity that
>>>> comes with portable extensions and @Producer methods. See our public
>>>> version here [1] (works since early CDI 1.0 days) .
>>>>
>>>> Instead of a @Inject + Qualifier we just use the qualifier @Property.
>>>> We support default values and type conversation for primitives and
>>>> everything that has a string based constructor. The property source can be
>>>> anything, from property files (default) to databases or xml files. For
>>>> examples see tests here [2].
>>>>
>>>> Nevertheless I am not sure if this should be part of an future CDI
>>>> spec. My concerns include the bloat argument, of course. But the main
>>>> reason relates to the fact that we have almost everything in the current
>>>> CDI spec already.
>>>>
>>>> Right now I am quite happy with an custom portable extension that does
>>>> everything for me. At the time we implemented the extension we realised
>>>> that the "hard part" was writing an extension that links a qualified
>>>> "optional injection point" with an @Producer method while supporting code
>>>> based default values. Luckily I had Arne in my team who did that within a
>>>> few minutes.
>>>>
>>>> Because of this experience I would propose that we simplify extension
>>>> development such that "optional injection points" may be linked to
>>>> @Produces values easily. Additionally we have to solve a few more
>>>> integration issues (e.g. read-only DB access should be available during CDI
>>>> startup). Everything else should be provided by portable extensions (e.g.
>>>> via delta-spike) and documentation/howtos at cdi-spec.org.
>>>>
>>>> Jens
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://github.com/openknowledge/openknowledge-cdi-extensions/tree/master/openknowledge-cdi-common/src/main/java/de/openknowledge/cdi/common/property
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://github.com/openknowledge/openknowledge-cdi-extensions/blob/master/openknowledge-cdi-common/src/test/java/de/openknowledge/cdi/common/property
>>>>
>>>> Von: Anatole Tresch <atsticks at gmail.com<mailto:atsticks at gmail.com>>
>>>> Datum: Friday 5 September 2014 21:22
>>>> An: Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves at gmail.com<mailto:
>>>> antonio.goncalves at gmail.com>>
>>>> Cc: CDI-Dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
>>>> Betreff: Re: [cdi-dev] With the end of Java Config...
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I would not like to add an XML "bloated" mechanism as part of CDI 2.0.
>>>> Spontaneously I would propose a more CDI like things like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Adding a @Configured annotation (basically a qualifier). This can
>>>> be in addition to @Inject and would allow to inject "configured" values.
>>>> * Since configuration can change we may think of a (CDI)
>>>> event/reinject mechanism based on config changes. By default, this is
>>>> switched off and we can discuss how it would be activated, e.g. by an
>>>> additional flag settable with the @Configured annotation, or an additional
>>>> @Observable ConfigChangeEvent (similar to the Griffon framework), or both.
>>>> * Hereby configured values theoretically behave similar as all
>>>> other injection points. They also can be qualified (the aspect of scopes, I
>>>> did not yet have time to think about). The only difference is, that they
>>>> are satisified using the configuration "system".
>>>> * The configuration "source" itself could in the extreme simplest
>>>> way be a Provider<Map<String,String>>. The CDI spec should not care about
>>>> how this map is provided (XML, DB, overrides, etc). This still can be
>>>> standardized later. As long as the ConfigurationSource SPI is defined,
>>>> companies still can hook in the logic and level of configuration
>>>> abstraction they need.
>>>> * Of course, since not only Strings can be injected, we need some
>>>> conversion or adapter logic as basically outlined in my blog. Also here we
>>>> can add a simple SPI and let the details to the RI.
>>>>
>>>> Summarizing a
>>>>
>>>> * @Configured annotation
>>>> * some kind of change event
>>>> * a ConfigurationSource extends Provider<MapString,String>>
>>>> * a conversion mechanism from String to T.
>>>>
>>>> we get a full fledged configuration mechanism that leverages CDI.
>>>>
>>>> That would be my idea basically. WDYT? I will try to work that out in
>>>> more details. Basically it should be implementable even with the CDI
>>>> mechanism already in place with CDI 1.1.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Anatole
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-09-05 16:08 GMT+02:00 Antonio Goncalves <
>>>> antonio.goncalves at gmail.com<mailto:antonio.goncalves at gmail.com>>:
>>>> One wise man* once said "EJB was a hype specification, we added too
>>>> many things to it, it became bloated. The next hype specifications are
>>>> JAX-RS and CDI, careful with them"
>>>>
>>>> Either we get this idea of "parts" right, or CDI will endup being
>>>> bloated.
>>>>
>>>> Antonio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *David Blevin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
>>>> antoine at sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine at sabot-durand.net>> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> You may have followed the rise and fall of the Java Config JSR (
>>>> http://javaeeconfig.blogspot.ch/2014/09/no-java-ee-configuration-for-ee8-dear.html
>>>> ).
>>>> Anatole in CC was leading this initiative and I proposed him to join us
>>>> and explore if some part of his late-JSR could be done in CDI.
>>>>
>>>> I?m mainly thinking of https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-123 or
>>>> related solution. If we achieve to have a majority of specs to integrate
>>>> with CDI, our configuration solution would therefore become a configuration
>>>> system for all spec based on CDI 2.0.
>>>>
>>>> Antoine
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antonio Goncalves
>>>> Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author
>>>>
>>>> Web site<http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter<
>>>> http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn<
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Pluralsight<
>>>> http://pluralsight.com/training/Authors/Details/antonio-goncalves> |
>>>> Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org> | Devoxx France<http://www.devoxx.fr
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Anatole Tresch
>>>> Java Lead Engineer, JSR Spec Lead
>>>> Gl?rnischweg 10
>>>> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>>>>
>>>> Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1
>>>> Twitter: @atsticks
>>>> Blogs: http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>>>> Google: atsticks
>>>> Mobile +41-76 344 62 79
>>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20140905/3d951250/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 46, Issue 20
>>>> ***************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Anatole Tresch*
>>>> Java Lead Engineer, JSR Spec Lead
>>>> Glärnischweg 10
>>>> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>>>>
>>>> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>>>> *Twitter: @atsticks*
>>>> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>>>> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>>>>
>>>> *Google: atsticksMobile +41-76 344 62 79*
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Anatole Tresch*
>>> Java Lead Engineer, JSR Spec Lead
>>> Glärnischweg 10
>>> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>>>
>>> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>>> *Twitter: @atsticks*
>>> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>>> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>>>
>>> *Google: atsticksMobile +41-76 344 62 79 <%2B41-76%20344%2062%2079>*
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Lead Engineer, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon
*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter: @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
*Google: atsticksMobile +41-76 344 62 79*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20140907/cd08b3ac/attachment-0001.html
More information about the cdi-dev
mailing list