[cdi-dev] [servlet-spec users] [jsr369-experts] [116-CDIRelatedBeansInServletSpec] PROPOSAL

[Mark Struberg]

Oh and before I get misinterpreted: it was pretty soon clear to all the EG that we need 2 Scopes. The question was just whether the existing CDI-1.0 @ApplicationScoped annotation should be the 1-per-EAR or the 1-per-Module. 



LieGrue,
strub




> On Friday, 21 November 2014, 20:33, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> wrote:
>>> "logical app" what's wrong with @ApplicationScoped 
> especially for JMS?
>> 
>>  We had this discussion quite some time ago. If you like to have fun then 
> read up CDI-129 ;)
>>  It basically boils down that the majority of CDI EG members wanted to 
> behave @ApplicationScoped as "1 per EAR", so we miss the "1 per 
> Module/WebApp".
> 
> This has indeed been discussed before and remains a problematic issue.
> Don't want to go too much off-topic here, but the scope of extensions
> and @Named within an EAR with multiple wars suffers from a similar
> issue. See e.g.
> http://balusc.blogspot.com/2013/10/cdi-behaved-unexpectedly-in-ear-so.html
> 
> Kind regards,
> Arjan
>