1 Reply Latest reply on May 29, 2009 11:12 PM by Gavin King

    Web Beans 27 May 2009 feedback

    Elias Ross Master

      A standard schema document and URL for beans.xml would be useful. Some sort of version attribute might be appropriate to introduce to the root element as well, similar to other JEE XML document.


      12.4 - Mostly for testing and mocking, it's useful to have no argument constructors for exceptions. So I hope they are included for every Exception.


      B.4 - Suggest adding ConversationException, parent of BusyConversationException, etc.


      B.8 - The annotation names @Production and @Produces seem potentially confusing. Production means creating of goods, result and only in computing does it pertain to a type of software deployment. I wonder if a different name couldn't be chosen for @Production, like @Release. Or @Creates/@Generates for @Produces, but this would be a more dramatic change . Would help people like me using Eclipse... so when I type @Pro... and hit ctrl-space I wouldn't be confused seeing both.


      11.2.8/9/10 - Seems like a removeBean()/Observer/Context would be useful as well. Having a way to add beans into a deployment suggests there should be a way to remove them. Maybe the semantics would be too hard to define and might be appropriate for the next release? Still, there are probably cases when adding a bunch of temporary beans would be appropriate.





        • 1. Re: Web Beans 27 May 2009 feedback
          Gavin King Master
          A standard schema document and URL for beans.xml would be useful. Some sort of version attribute might be appropriate to introduce to the root element as well, similar to other JEE XML document.


          Right, and this will be part of the RI. It's not needed in the prose specification.


          12.4 - Mostly for testing and mocking, it's useful to have no argument constructors for exceptions. So I hope they are included for every Exception.


          OK, I added two constructors to InjectionException to match those declared on java.lang.RuntimeException.


          B.4 - Suggest adding ConversationException, parent of BusyConversationException, etc.


          Hrm, unless you have a specific usecase in mind, I would prefer not to add an additional type in this release. If this turns out to be a mistake, we can fix it in a maintenance release.


          B.8 - The annotation names @Production and @Produces seem potentially confusing.


          I don't want to change these names at this stage.


          11.2.8/9/10 - Seems like a removeBean()/Observer/Context would be useful as well. Having a way to add beans into a deployment suggests there should be a way to remove them. Maybe the semantics would be too hard to define and might be appropriate for the next release?


          Yes, this doesn't seem like something that we need to do in this release.