Support disabling messaging annotations processing by mjd507 · Pull Request #11039 · spring-projects/spring-integration

mjd507 · 2026-06-03T07:25:04Z

By adding spring.integration.annotations.enable=false into the environment property or application.properties.

When disabled, the following post processors are not registered in the application context:

MessagingAnnotationPostProcessor
MessagingAnnotationBeanPostProcessor

artembilan

Please, don't touch GatewayProxyInstantiationPostProcessor and IntegrationComponentScanRegistrar.
They are for components scanning, for those which represents some entries on classpath.

Their purpose similar to the @ComponentScan in Spring Framework.

What we are trying to prevent here is annotations on methods in beans.
So, our goal would be similar to opting-in into something like @EnableMvc, but that does not mean that when we don't opt-in, the @ComponentScan should not work, too.

I agree that something like @EnableIntegrationMethodAnnotations would sound better for you to not look into the IntegrationComponentScanRegistrar, but I don't think we need to go such a fine-grain naming while we can just document this new property and future annotation properly.

Please, make a respective change and we will come back to you shortly for the further review.

Thanks

By adding `spring.integration.annotations.enable=false` into the environment property or application.properties. When disabled, the following post processors are not registered in the application context: - `MessagingAnnotationPostProcessor` - `MessagingAnnotationBeanPostProcessor` Signed-off-by: Jiandong Ma <jiandong.ma.cn@gmail.com>

artembilan

Please, consider to mention this property in the respective annotations chapter and in the what’s new one, too.

thanks

Signed-off-by: Jiandong Ma <jiandong.ma.cn@gmail.com>

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:43:26Z

 		ExtendedAnnotationMetadata importingClassMetadata = new ExtendedAnnotationMetadata(element);
 		BeanDefinitionRegistry registry = parserContext.getRegistry();
-		new IntegrationRegistrar()
+		integrationRegistrar


This looks awkward having a method call on a different line.
This is really not a method chain as it was before with the ctor, and it is not that long to justify separation.
Just nit-pick for the code readability.

Thanks

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:43:41Z

 		}
 	}

+	static final String ENV_ENABLE_MESSAGING_ANNOTATIONS_PROCESSING = "spring.integration.annotations.enable";


Why do we need this constant at all?

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:44:03Z

+
 		if (importingClassMetadata != null) {
-			registerMessagingAnnotationPostProcessors(registry);
+			if (this.environment.getProperty(ENV_ENABLE_MESSAGING_ANNOTATIONS_PROCESSING, Boolean.class, true)) {


Why these to ifs cannot be combined into one &&?

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:45:09Z

 ----

+NOTE: Starting with version 7.1, the `spring.integration.annotations.enable` environment property can be used to control method-level annotation processing.
+By default, this property is `true`. It can be set to `false` for applications that exclusively rely on `IntegrationFlow` definitions.


One sentence per line, please: https://asciidoctor.org/docs/asciidoc-recommended-practices/#one-sentence-per-line

I think just talking about IntegrationFlow is not correct: no one said that @EnableIntegration is for annotations and flows.
There are a lot in the infra added for integration, and there are some other ways to implement integration solution, not just with IntegrationFlow and/or annotations.
Just saying disable messaging annotations processing should be enough.
That's exactly a purpose of this property, and everything else related to integration is left untouched.

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:48:17Z

 }
 ----

+NOTE: Starting with version 7.1, the `spring.integration.annotations.enable` environment property can be used to control method-level annotation processing.


I think the "environment" is a bit confusing here.
It might be messed up with the ENV vars, which will work in Spring of course, but that is not a limitation.

Let's revise this sentence to something more context-specific:

the `spring.integration.annotations.enable` property in the Spring environment can be used to control method-level messaging annotations processing.

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:52:27Z

 The `MessageTransformingHandler.requiresReply` flag cannot be modified: an `UnsupportedOperationException` is thrown from the overridden `setRequiresReply()` method to indicate the transformer pattern cannot produce nulls for replies.
 See xref:transformer.adoc[] for more information.

+A new `spring.integration.annotations.enable` environment property is introduced to control method-level annotation processing. Setting this property to `false` optimizes startup performance for applications that exclusively rely on `IntegrationFlow` definitions.


According to my comment in the annotations.adoc this sentence should be fixed as well.
More over, no need to say too much in this bullet-style what's new chapter.
If you want to know more, follow the provided link.

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:53:55Z

+	}
+
+	@RetryingTest(10)
+	void testEnableVersusDisablePerformance() {


I think we don't need this test at all.
It does not verify anything and just prove a premise of the request, which simply could be done outside of the project as a regular issue handling process.

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:56:16Z

+
+	@Configuration
+	@EnableIntegration
+	@Import(ServiceActivatorComponent.class)


This feels like awkward pattern for just regular bean-style class.
In most cases the @Import is for @Configuration classes from user perspective.
Consider to declare this ServiceActivatorComponent as a @Bean.

artembilan · 2026-06-04T14:58:08Z

+	static class Config {
+
+		@Bean
+		DirectChannel inputChannel() {


We don't need to declare this bean explicitly: the @ServiceActivator does the trick for us to create that bean on the fly.
And that is what you should prove in those tests.
So, if no annotation post-processor, then even no bean for inputChannel.

Makes sense?

mjd507 mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2026

Allow skipping messaging annotation post processor registration in pure DSL scenarios #11024

Open

artembilan requested changes Jun 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

mjd507 force-pushed the gh-11024-option4 branch from ffd54fb to 5a74aac Compare June 4, 2026 00:13

mjd507 force-pushed the gh-11024-option4 branch from 5a74aac to f15139a Compare June 4, 2026 00:27

artembilan requested changes Jun 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

mjd507 requested a review from artembilan June 4, 2026 02:55

Address Comments and update whats-new.adoc & annotations.adoc

9c02447

Signed-off-by: Jiandong Ma <jiandong.ma.cn@gmail.com>

mjd507 force-pushed the gh-11024-option4 branch from 2848a78 to 9c02447 Compare June 4, 2026 06:40

artembilan requested changes Jun 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

mjd507 commented Jun 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

artembilan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

artembilan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

mjd507 commented Jun 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading