[cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes with non-private final methods

Werner Keil werner.keil at gmail.com
Wed Feb 10 05:27:56 EST 2016


+1

Werner

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:43 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] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes
>       with non-private final methods (Thomas Andraschko)
>    2. Re: [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes
>       with non-private final methods (Jens Schumann)
>    3. Re: [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes
>       with non-private final methods (Emily Jiang)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:08:53 +0100
> From: Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.thomas at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of
>         classes with non-private final methods
> To: Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <CAAuOd=W2s4S1-ke+vnyGOa-mrCBY9aU9bjuLZh1=
> cFDmwZ6ouA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> +1
>
> not sure if the PR is the best way but as mark already said, it would solve
> a problem in a portable way which exists in some real world applications
>
> 2016-02-09 18:00 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>:
>
> > +1
> >
> > This is a real world problem and it would imo be a pitty to not have it
> in
> > the spec in a portable way.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> > > Am 09.02.2016 um 17:36 schrieb Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> > antoine at sabot-durand.net>:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > There have been a lot of discussion around CDI-527 in the last weeks:
> > > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-527
> > >
> > > Mark proposed a PR:
> > > https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/271
> > >
> > > But we don't agree on adding this feature to the spec.
> > > This vote is to decide if we should add this feature at the spec level
> > now, or not.
> > > Should we vote this feature down, that won't mean it will be completely
> > dropped: it could be implemented as non portable feature in both Spec or
> > even be included as experimental feature in the spec (in annexes) as
> > describe in the PR comments
> > > Vote starts now, only vote from EG members are binding (but you can
> give
> > your opinion if not part of the EG) and will last 72 hours.
> > >
> > > You vote with the following values:
> > > +1 : I'm favorable for adding this feature in the spec
> > > -1 : I'm against adding this feature in the spec
> > > 0 : I don't care
> > >
> > > Thank you for your attention and your vote.
> > >
> > > Antoine Sabot-Durand
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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.
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160209/b815dcb8/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 17:13:50 +0000
> From: Jens Schumann <jens.schumann at openknowledge.de>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of
>         classes with non-private final methods
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID: <D2DFD4AB.60744%jens.schumann at openknowledge.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> +1
>
> (even though I can live with a portable alternative approach to the
> current PR)
>
> So far I did not express my support for this PR even though I promised to
> do so. Unable to proxy those classes is a major issue to me while migrating
> old software to a newer environment.
>
> As soon as you deal with 5 to 10+ years old software and try to migrate
> your large application step by step you will encounter framework base
> classes with (protected) final methods. CDI, @Inject and interceptors help
> a lot to cleanup the old stuff, however I have to extend (currently
> unproxyable) framework base classes to do so. Example: I have to extend
> AbstractFrameworkXyzAction with public and/ or protected final methods to
> implement use case logic, and the derived classes should be CDI beans.
>
> On the other hand - changing the old jar's is not an option either.
>
> With this feature I can stop copying the modified base classes to my local
> archive (mostly .war)  in order to override the old classes.
>
> Jens
>
>
>
>
> Von: <cdi-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org<mailto:
> cdi-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org>> on behalf of Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net<mailto:antoine at sabot-durand.net>>
> Datum: Tuesday 9 February 2016 17:36
> An: CDI-Dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org<mailto:cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
> Betreff: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes
> with non-private final methods
>
> Hi all,
>
> There have been a lot of discussion around CDI-527 in the last weeks:
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-527
>
> Mark proposed a PR:
> https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/271
>
> But we don't agree on adding this feature to the spec.
> This vote is to decide if we should add this feature at the spec level
> now, or not.
> Should we vote this feature down, that won't mean it will be completely
> dropped: it could be implemented as non portable feature in both Spec or
> even be included as experimental feature in the spec (in annexes) as
> describe in the PR comments
> Vote starts now, only vote from EG members are binding (but you can give
> your opinion if not part of the EG) and will last 72 hours.
>
> You vote with the following values:
> +1 : I'm favorable for adding this feature in the spec
> -1 : I'm against adding this feature in the spec
> 0 : I don't care
>
> Thank you for your attention and your vote.
>
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160209/3cafc912/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 17:42:59 +0000
> From: Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG at uk.ibm.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of
>         classes with non-private final methods
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <201602091743.u19Hh60g030078 at d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> +1.
> This is a really useful feature as more and more customers will move
> forward to Java8 and might hit this problem.
>
> Many thanks,
> Emily
> ===========================
> Emily Jiang
> WebSphere Application Server, CDI Development Lead
>
> MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
> Phone:  +44 (0)1962 816278  Internal: 246278
>
> Email: emijiang at uk.ibm.com
> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM at IBMGB
>
>
>
>
> From:   Jens Schumann <jens.schumann at openknowledge.de>
> To:     cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>,
> Date:   09/02/2016 17:15
> Subject:        Re: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying
> of classes with non-private final methods
> Sent by:        cdi-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org
>
>
>
> +1
>
> (even though I can live with a portable alternative approach to the
> current PR)
>
> So far I did not express my support for this PR even though I promised to
> do so. Unable to proxy those classes is a major issue to me while
> migrating old software to a newer environment.
>
> As soon as you deal with 5 to 10+ years old software and try to migrate
> your large application step by step you will encounter framework base
> classes with (protected) final methods. CDI, @Inject and interceptors help
> a lot to cleanup the old stuff, however I have to extend (currently
> unproxyable) framework base classes to do so. Example: I have to extend
> AbstractFrameworkXyzAction with public and/ or protected final methods to
> implement use case logic, and the derived classes should be CDI beans.
>
> On the other hand - changing the old jar's is not an option either.
>
> With this feature I can stop copying the modified base classes to my local
> archive (mostly .war)  in order to override the old classes.
>
> Jens
>
>
>
>
> Von: <cdi-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org> on behalf of Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net>
> Datum: Tuesday 9 February 2016 17:36
> An: CDI-Dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Betreff: [cdi-dev] [Vote] for CDI-527 / PR 271 allow proxying of classes
> with non-private final methods
>
> Hi all,
>
> There have been a lot of discussion around CDI-527 in the last weeks:
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-527
>
> Mark proposed a PR:
> https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/271
>
> But we don't agree on adding this feature to the spec.
> This vote is to decide if we should add this feature at the spec level
> now, or not.
> Should we vote this feature down, that won't mean it will be completely
> dropped: it could be implemented as non portable feature in both Spec or
> even be included as experimental feature in the spec (in annexes) as
> describe in the PR comments
> Vote starts now, only vote from EG members are binding (but you can give
> your opinion if not part of the EG) and will last 72 hours.
>
> You vote with the following values:
> +1 : I'm favorable for adding this feature in the spec
> -1 : I'm against adding this feature in the spec
> 0 : I don't care
>
> Thank you for your attention and your vote.
>
> Antoine Sabot-Durand_______________________________________________
> 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.
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160209/4fcc1e81/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 63, Issue 7
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160210/c7ac0d87/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the cdi-dev mailing list