exclude listeners + yaml

[Mike Nereson]

mykola.nickishov: what do you think about excluded listeners? are they practically usefull?

That is a good question. Lets look at default-architecture-rules.xml

<architecture>
  <configuration>
    <sources no-packages="ignore"/>

    <cyclicalDependency test="true"/>

    <listeners>
      <include>
        <listener>org.architecturerules.listeners.LoggerListener</listener>
        <listener>org.architecturerules.listeners.ReportListener</listener>
      </include>
    </listeners>

    <properties>
      <property key="report.output.directory" value="target/architecture"/>
      <property key="report.output.format" value="xml"/>
    </properties>

  </configuration>
</architecture>

Since we include the two default listeners, we should have a way to remove those listeners. So for that reason I do believe that the answer to your question is YES. We should be able to exclude listeners.

So this needs to be added to the XML DTD and the programmatic API.

We'll just go with

<listeners>
  <include>
    <listener/>
  </include>
  <exclude>
    <listener/>
  <exclude>
</listeners>

I have made an issue out of this text http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/issues/detail?id=85


mykola.nickishov: issue 83 (yaml) is almost ready. could you check this?

Check what out? This? http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/source/detail?r=694

Do you want to change the issue from Milestone-Release3.1 to Milestone-Release3.0?

An update for anyone else, Mykola has been working on an API to support many different configuration formats to include yaml. Here is some information on that

http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/issues/detail?id=83
http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/source/detail?r=685
http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/source/detail?r=694



~ Mike Nereson

[Mykola Nikishov]

Mike Nereson <miken...@gmail.com> writes:

> mykola.nickishov: issue 83 (yaml) is almost ready. could you check this?
>
> Check what out? This?
> http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/source/detail?r=694

Yes, you are right.

> Do you want to change the issue from Milestone-Release3.1 to
> Milestone-Release3.0?

I'm not sure about this. There are two issues:

- default configuration should be handled in a different way (not urgent though).
- excluded listeners for YAML are not yet supported.

> An update for anyone else, Mykola has been working on an API to
> support many different configuration formats to include yaml.

API was implemented with
http://code.google.com/p/architecturerules/source/detail?r=686

--
MAN-UANIC

[Mykola Nikishov]

Mike Nereson <miken...@gmail.com> writes:

> mykola.nickishov: what do you think about excluded listeners? are they practically usefull?
>
> That is a good question. Lets look at default-architecture-rules.xml

[skip]

> Since we include the two default listeners, we should have a way to
> remove those listeners. So for that reason I do believe that the
> answer to your question is YES. We should be able to exclude
> listeners.

Ok, org.architecturerules.listeners.LoggerListener implements
logging. But do we really need this enabled by default? And in this case
why its removal should be allowed?
org.architecturerules.listeners.ReportListener is empty and may be
safely removed.

Here is my -1 for excluded listeners.

--
MAN-UANIC

[Mike Nereson]

Ok, org.architecturerules.

listeners.LoggerListener implements
logging. But do we really need this enabled by default? And in this case
why its removal should be allowed?
org.architecturerules.listeners.ReportListener is empty and may be
safely removed.

All of the logging is supposed to be moved into the LoggerListener and the ReportLIstener was supposed to be written all for the 3.0 release. That was the original plan. 

~ Mike Nereson