> On Nov 10, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/11/15 14:50, Santiago Pericasgeertsen wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 8, 2015, at 12:52 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Santiago
>>>
>>> I guess the source of my own 'confusion' is this one:
>>>
>>> - text/sse-stream CT has no relationship to the actual content being returned
>>> while in a normal HTTP a CT has a direct relationship (so much for SSE being HTTP friendly)
>>
>> No, this is not true. The stream that you’re returning looks like this:
>>
>> event: foo
>> data: { “a” : “b”}
>>
>> event: bar
>> data: { “c” : “d”}
>> …
> Well, obviously I referred to the 'data' piece, so indeed text/sse-stream has no relation to
> { “c” : “d”}
It does in the sense that you’re sending “text”, which in this example happens to be JSON. In fact, every data event can have a different “type” of text in same stream: an event’s data could be application/json and another event’s data could be text/plain. This is why a default makes more sense than an annotation that we normally use to refer to the entire stream not a single event.
— Santiago
>
>>
>> The overall structure is SSE and not JSON.
>>
>>> - @Produces in JAX-RS has always had an effect on selecting the response CT, *but also* on MBR - while
>>> a @Produces("text/sss-stream") does not help with selecting MBR which implies that in this case we partially overload it.
>>
>> Look above, someone needs to insert the tags “event:”, “data:”, the right spacing, etc.
>>
> Well, so given what I've just clarified, where is the conflict, or rather a worse version of supporting SSE compared to the current version, in what I did propose ?
>
> Sergey
>
>> — Santiago
>>
>>> @POST
>>> @SseProduces
>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
>>> public SseEvenOutput startDomain() {
>>> }
>>>
>>> would be neater IMHO - @SseProduces is a reference to a technical aspect of SSE, i.e. its req to have text/event-stream.
>>> The meaning of @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) (only if it is set - the builder is still available for event specific MT)
>>> is the same as it is known to JAX-RS developers now - perhaps something like APPLICATION_JSON
>>> can be used to set that internal CT property (in the actual given SSE payload) Markus referred to earlier - in which case it would be completely consistent...
>>>
>>> Sergey
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/11/15 00:14, Santiago Pericasgeertsen wrote:
>>>> Sergey,
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, I see what you mean, but I think that violates the spec. A method-level @Produces is supposed to override a class-level one, ultimately resulting in the value of Content-Type in the response.
>>>>
>>>> I think what you proposed will introduce a lot of confusion. Alternatively, we could provide a default MT programmatically for all events to be created instead, if that addresses the issue that you have in mind.
>>>>
>>>> — Santiago
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 3, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L103>https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L103 <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L103> (1)
>>>>>
>>>>> Replace @Produces(text/event-stream) with Produces(application/json) and add @SSE and that works neatly, otherwise if we keep
>>>>> @Produces(text/event-stream) there and have Produces(application/json) at this level
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L62 <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L62> (2)
>>>>>
>>>>> then when I do
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L112 <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/46d81cf3c5826f62e5824d5330fa4d59ffa0d98f/examples/src/main/java/jaxrs/examples/sse/ServerSentEventsResource.java#L112> (3)
>>>>>
>>>>> (but use MyBean instead to be serialized as JSON) the class level Produces(application-json) (ref (2) above) it will be ignored and the only way to set application/json is to use the builder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/11/15 16:55, Santiago Pericasgeertsen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Sergey Beryozkin < <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Santiago
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I'm wondering if inserting a special MT would interfere with the regular policy of figuring out what MT should be allocated to a given data piece.
>>>>>>> Example if I do not use SSE, I can put Produces on Class or on Method or in Response. If we keep depending on a special MT to make a method initiating an SSE output then the only mechanism to set an event data MT is to use a builder, neither Class or Method Produces can be used which would be unfortunate IMHO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I’m not sure I follow. The MT of the method/class/response is always text/event-stream, so indeed any other MT will be supplied while constructing each SSE event. Is that what you meant? If not, please provide some code :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> — Santiago
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not proposing to block text/event-stream but rather treat it as a technical aspect of implementing SSE, i.e, it is an SSE protocol specific 'demarcation' MT which does not have any relevance to the format of the actual data (referring here to the MT/format used to select JAXRS providers) pushed inside this text/event-stream 'envelope'. Example, having both @SSE for the purpose of marking the method and @Produces for the purpose of specifying the *default* MT for the event data fragments (while letting users override if with a builder if needed) can work well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 29/10/15 13:17, Santiago Pericasgeertsen wrote:
>>>>>>>> Sergey,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Inlined.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My understanding the format of the message is expected to be known to the client (example, it is JSON all the time in a known representation, etc),
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, there is nothing in the SSE protocol about an event's MT. There is a single MT returned in the response, and that is text/event-stream. The reason for the MT proposal is simply so that JAX-RS can find the correct MBW.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was more curious about the default MT that would be used for selecting MBW for serializing a custom event object…
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In my view, this ought to be consistent with the way we handle the return of an entity in a resource method without an @Produces. In other words, it should be consistent with the algorithm in Section 3.8.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> — Santiago
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If a builder media type property is not set then at least for String toString() will produce a meaningful message, but a Object.toString() should not be allowed to escape if a user forgets to set a MT builder property
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>> On 28/10/15 18:55, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Quoted from W3C: <The default event type is "message">.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Actually there is problem with MIME and SSE: W3C does not define how to transfer the Content-Type. They do specify that one can add any name to a field (like "content-type") but that name is not mandatory. Without it, our only chance is assuming "String", actually -- even if this means "toString()".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Oktober 2015 19:18
>>>>>>>>>> To: jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jax-rs-spec users] SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Either by the return type or otherwise by something like @SSE, please see the prototype below
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> By the way, this is probably orthogonal, but what is the default MT (for the purpose of selecting MBW) if the event object is not String but say MyEvent.
>>>>>>>>>> Is toString() a default ? That would work for String but would look not good for custom objects
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 28/10/15 17:59, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Understood. So how to detect SSE then if not by MT? By return type?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Oktober 2015 00:26
>>>>>>>>>> To: jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jax-rs-spec users] SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or per-event MT approach can still work where, if set, it overrides a method specific Produces, exactly as it works with a regular JAX-RS response.
>>>>>>>>>> So I guess the only thing I suggest is to make setting text/event-stream implicit and keep Produces for specifying the event format if preferred...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>> On 27/10/15 23:22, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Markus, I'm not suggesting to redefine, I'm suggesting to make the way SSE is implemented in JAX-RS a little bit less technical as far as users working with it are concerned ?
>>>>>>>>>> Re restricting to a single MT for all the events inside a single channel, is it a bad thing ? I'm not sure. We can always assume that in theory it is possible, but lets face it, I doubt anyone can come up with a practical example where multiple MTs are mixed in. In fact supporting per-event MT can be added later on at a builder level if such a freedom of formatting is ever needed...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>>>>>>> On 27/10/15 22:32, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> But Sergey, we only should define an API how SSE can be mapped upon JAX-RS. We cannot redefine how SSE works. And it is simply the W3C that defined that SSE is initiated by sending that particular MT and that each single event can definitively have different entity type. What you propose certainly looks more familiar, but would redefine the W3C-defined semantics of SSE.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2015 23:25
>>>>>>>>>> To: jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jax-rs-spec users] SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have to admit I'm still uncomfortable about a specialized Produces(text/event-stream) in this case. I could not figure why until yesterday... Basically this is what the SSE spec requires to accompany the data going to the SSE channel - but it is orthogonal to the act of converting the data into event specific formats such as JSON or plain text.
>>>>>>>>>> When myself and possibly other users see Produces they think this is the format of the response data.
>>>>>>>>>> Having an SSE-required MT in a method @Produces does not fit well into a JAX-RS state of 'mind'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Letting people set MT for individual events actually loosens the API - i.e, the API makes it very easy to do what is obviously not meant to be, mixing different formats in a single channel, 1st event is JSON, next is XML. Of course we can say the users needs to know what to do, but it is different from having an API which does not explicitly allows such nonsense operations...In 2.0 one can also do it, say mess up with writing into StreamingOutput - but the user needs to try hard :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to return to discussing this idea:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @POST
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
>>>>>>>>>> public SseEvenOutput startDomain() {
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @POST
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
>>>>>>>>>> @SSE
>>>>>>>>>> public Response startDomain() {
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In either case, setting text/event-stream is the responsibility of the runtime, something that will be documented in the spec/API, it is implicit, while
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) represents the format of the every event fragment for a given SSE output channel...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 22/10/15 16:11, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Santiago
>>>>>>>>>> On 22/10/15 15:29, Santiago Pericasgeertsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is how I reason about media types associated with events. First, sometimes the data associated with an event is structured, most notably these days it’s JSON. JAX-RS already has a facility for mapping Java objects to representations (MBR/MBW) whose selection is based on MTs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This mechanism is there for entities, but it is only natural to see if it can be extended for SSE event data. To do so, you need to specify an MT for the event’s data. If we don’t allow re-usability of this mechanism, we’d either only support string messages or build a completely different mechanism, which seems like an overkill.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure, +1, indeed reusing MBR/MBW for this is perfect
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I’m still unsure about interceptors: to me interceptors and MBR/MBW’s are inseparable, but at the same time it’s not clear what advantages they bring in this case.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've no strong opinion right now about it. I can imagine some confusion about the response interceptors/filters meant for processing 'main' HTTP channel responses being also used for filtering sse events, though I can also imagine may me some events being blocked by filters if needed, not really sure right now :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> — Santiago
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2015, at 4:46 PM, Sergey Beryozkin < <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Markus - OK, thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> Still looks like a foreign body, this @Produces...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The question about formatting the event data fragments still remains,
>>>>>>>>>> If we are including MBW then surely not because we need a help with writing String into output stream.
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, actually.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/master/jaxrs-api/src/main/java/javax/ws/rs/sse/OutboundSseEvent.java#L108> <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/master/jaxrs-api/src/main/java/javax/ws/rs/sse/OutboundSseEvent.java#L108>https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/master/jaxrs-api/src/main/java/javax/ws/rs/sse/OutboundSseEvent.java#L108 <https://github.com/mpotociar/api/blob/master/jaxrs-api/src/main/java/javax/ws/rs/sse/OutboundSseEvent.java#L108>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So ended up doing some home work after all :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 21/10/15 19:05, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> maybe there is a misunderstanding: The W3C SSE specification clearly says that the initiation of a SSE channel _is_ by declaring a content type of text/event-stream. Hence this is not a marker made up by JAX-RS, but it definitivel _is_ correct according to the W3C.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Markus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2015 13:26
>>>>>>>>>> To: jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [jax-rs-spec users] SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Marek
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Few comments/questions,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Re the special MediaType vs the MediaType for individual event writes,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How is a Media Type for an event data fragment is specified ?
>>>>>>>>>> And can we assume that the same MediaType is used for all the event writes ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If it is a single Media Type then I'd object to the idea of a *special* MT, example, if every event write is a JSON payload, why do
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @POST
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.SERVER_SENT_EVENTS)
>>>>>>>>>> public SseEvenOutput startDomain() {
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This actually appears to be a bit off the JAX-RS style because we use MediaType.SERVER_SENT_EVENTS as a marker of the method which initiates
>>>>>>>>>> SseEvenOutput but not the *format* of the response event data chunks, it overloads the concept of Produces IMHO.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Should we just have
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @POST
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
>>>>>>>>>> public SseEvenOutput startDomain() {
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which is more in line with a StreamingOutput like pattern ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The runtime can mark startDomain() as needed given the response type is SseEvenOutput and if Response (or AsyncResponse ?) are allowed then
>>>>>>>>>> we can do
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @POST
>>>>>>>>>> @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON)
>>>>>>>>>> @SSE
>>>>>>>>>> public Response startDomain() {
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 21/10/15 11:42, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> At the same time, it is the spec lead job to steer the EG and the JSR outcome. And since it was me and Santiago who submitted the JSR charter, EG does not need to find interpretations, EG can simply ask the spec leads to provide the explanation. 😉
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In case of CDI, our intention was to improve the alignment of @Inject and scope support. FWIW, we’re still hoping that CDI 2.0 will become more modularized so that we do not have to formally deal with the whole spec (that becomes more and more bloated by features less and less relevant to “context and dependency injection” problem), only with it’s core pieces. So once, again, our CDI alignment is about aligning the JAX-RS injection support with CDI. It is NOT about integration with CDI eventing (for SSE support or whatever other purpose).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hope the explanation above is clear enough and does not require further interpretation in EG.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As for the SSE support, we want to provide a facility that fits well into JAX-RS programming model. And since SSE is really just a (special) media type, the proposed API is building on top of the existing support for entity providers in JAX-RS. So to touch on the questions you raised in more detail:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - Yes, we plan to leverage message body readers and writers for each single SSE event. We do not plan to engage Filters and Interceptors with each event, those should only be engaged when the request or response is initiated.
>>>>>>>>>> - Injectable SseEventOutput is certainly an option to consider. At the same time, we do need to find a way how to provide access to event builder and broadcaster, so rather than injecting three separate things, it so far seems to me simpler to just inject the context and use it to get access to all of the important components. In any case, we can simply look into this further to see what can be done to make the API simpler.
>>>>>>>>>> - To your comment "I do not see why creating the SseOutput from an SseContext should be the responsibility of the application programmer.”, my response is that SSE stream is a representation of a resource in the JAX-RS philosophy. So it is only natural that the JAX-RS resources return the new instance of SSE stream from a resource method. That’s the common JAX-RS programming model.
>>>>>>>>>> - To respond to your item #3, other than my CDI related comments earlier in this email, SSE is a standardized spec with well defined standard APIs. It IMO begs for a dedicated API. Otherwise it would not make any sense to provide a special support for it. It is only good that we can come up with a really small API (8 classes) that fits well the JAX-RS programming model and is tailored to support this technology. SSE is a specific technology that covers important, but again specific use cases. Coming up with some clever abstractions is not going to provide any real user value, I’m afraid.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Marek
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 20 Oct 2015, at 22:53, Markus KARG < <mailto:markus_at_headcrashing.eu>markus_at_headcrashing.eu <mailto:markus_at_headcrashing.eu>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, according to the JCP bylaws, it is the expert group to define the outcome of the JSR. So it is up to us to interpret the charter as we like. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 20. Oktober 2015 22:43
>>>>>>>>>> To: <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Markus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I suspect it is about better support for Inject, etc, but not sure
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>>>>>>> On 20/10/15 21:37, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If we cannot, why did the JCP accept the JSR 370 charter, which clearly requests CDI integration?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [ <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>]
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 20. Oktober 2015 22:23
>>>>>>>>>> To: <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net <mailto:jsr370-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SSE Draft
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can a 2.1 (non major version) introduce a strong CDI dep ? MVC is a diff
>>>>>>>>>> story.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sergey
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 20/10/15 16:26, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/19/2015 5:19 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (1) Maybe I missed the code line, but will it be possible to send an
>>>>>>>>>> entity so MBWs, Filters and Interceptors are getting involved? In the
>>>>>>>>>> end, we do not write an SSE server, but actually do add SSE to JAX-RS.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like: sseContext.newEvent().name("custom-message").data(myEntity); =>
>>>>>>>>>> use MBW to stream entity, applying all filters and interceptors that
>>>>>>>>>> are registered for the resource class that owns this SSE channel.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (2) I am not convinced that the complexity is needed. Why is there a
>>>>>>>>>> SseEventOutput and an SseContext? Can't we simply inject an SseOutput
>>>>>>>>>> in the resource automatically? I do not see why creating the
>>>>>>>>>> SseOutput from an SseContext should be the responsibility of the
>>>>>>>>>> application programmer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (3) I am not convinced that the technology of SSE should also bring
>>>>>>>>>> with it its own eventing subsystem. Wouldn't it make more sense to
>>>>>>>>>> rely on CDI events? Using CDI events we could allow events origin
>>>>>>>>>> from other Java EE components (like JCA, MDB or timed EJBs) to be
>>>>>>>>>> forwarded in a protocol-transparent way into the JAX-RS container,
>>>>>>>>>> which then is the only one that has to know that SSE is used to
>>>>>>>>>> transport the event to the http client. As JAX-RS is an integral part
>>>>>>>>>> of Java EE, and as SSE is a web-only technology, I don't like the
>>>>>>>>>> idea that either non-web-components are polluted by SSE, or
>>>>>>>>>> non-web-events couldn't be forwarded to SSE clients.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What would SSE over CDI look like?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>