[cdi-dev] Fwd: [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-346) Unclear relation between bean discovery and @WithAnnotations

Pete Muir pmuir at bleepbleep.org.uk
Tue Mar 12 06:25:04 EDT 2013

The words I used were "explicit bean archive" and "implicit bean archive" - explicit because it has a beans.xml so is explicitly a bean archive, and implicit as the inverse of this.

If you've got other suggestions, I would love to hear them, but as usual, this is the best *I* was able to come up with, and so complaining without providing alternative ideas won't actually result in any improvement ;-)

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Mark Struberg (JIRA)" <jira-events at lists.jboss.org>
> Subject: [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-346) Unclear relation between bean discovery and @WithAnnotations
> Date: 11 March 2013 08:08:41 GMT
> To: pmuir at bleepbleep.org.uk
> Mark Struberg commented on  CDI-346
> Unclear relation between bean discovery and @WithAnnotations
> Agree. Plus it's also not possible in an Extension to know from which 'kind' of bean archive the current PAT did come from. We e.g. cannot make this depending on any previously fired ProcessModule event as CDI containers might run the discovery in parallel threads.
> If some Extension gets a PAT with a class without any scope, should it handle this class? Well, that depends whether this BDA is an 'automatic' or a 'non-pickup' (whatever non-intuitive wording got chosen finally) bean archive.
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20130312/675a0d18/attachment.html 

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list