[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-106) Support JMS mappings
richardhightower at gmail.com
Sat Apr 30 16:33:06 EDT 2011
Ok. I don't want to open up a can of worms for sure. However, there are other jsrs that have to run in both a java se and a java ee environment. If they want to use cdi for annotation processing and interception, then there should be a core cdi and other stuff. Even if we don't split cdi into two perhaps we could specify something more clear on how the client pieces should work and be bootstrapped.
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 30, 2011, at 1:17 PM, "Mark Struberg (JIRA)" <jira-events at lists.jboss.org> wrote:
> [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12599255#comment-12599255 ]
> Mark Struberg commented on CDI-106:
> Yea, I know what you mean and we already discussed this in the past. Basically it's a matter of taste.
> Gavins argument was that a certified CDI container (all TCK passes) needs to support the whole EE range. But every implementation is also free to define a stripped down variant on it's own - which is then _not_ spec compliant.
> We could of course try to define a minimum feature set of functionality for running in a SE environment. But then politics kick in! JSR-299 was originally EXPLICITLY defines as for Java ENTERPRISE! And extending this to SE was kind of a blasphemy already. For example: check the history of the CDI spec name
> Just trust me, you don't like to know all the gory details ... ;)
>> Support JMS mappings
>> Key: CDI-106
>> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-106
>> Project: CDI Specification Issues
>> Issue Type: Feature Request
>> Reporter: Pete Muir
>> Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed)
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
More information about the cdi-dev