[cdi-dev] Contexts behavior in SE and Async Event for EDR1

Fri Jun 19 12:26:54 EDT 2015

@Mark: said shortly cdictrl should go in the spec. Allowing to write an
request scoped executor service should be possible for frameworks
Le 19 juin 2015 17:21, "Mark Struberg" <struberg at yahoo.de> a écrit :

> Romain, I think I totally lost you. Which part of it is not portable? Do
> you have any example?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> > Am 19.06.2015 um 14:59 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > Looks like you miss the main point. The usage is not portable most of
> the time. Cant we make it portable?
> >
> > Le 19 juin 2015 13:57, "Jozef Hartinger" <jharting at redhat.com> a écrit :
> > I agree with Martin and Mark. @RequestScoped already is used as a
> > general purpose task-bound scope. This covers, but is not limited to,
> > HTTP request. On the other hand @SessionScoped and @ConversationScoped
> > are only defined to be available for HTTP requests.
> >
> > On 06/19/2015 08:43 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote:
> > > Jozef, Martin,
> > >
> > >
> > > What is your POV on that ?
> > >
> > > Antoine
> > >
> > >
> > >> Le 18 juin 2015 à 20:37, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> a écrit :
> > >>
> > >> 1.) The whole point is that @RequestScoped is NOT a web context!
> > >>
> > >> Otherwise it would _not_ be active in JMS etc…
> > >> And that was not an accident but intentional.
> > >>
> > >> 2.) And no, different async threads will _never_ get the same request
> context…
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 3.) no @RequestScoped is a sub-part of a @ThreadScoped. Otherwise you
> would get the same context for 2 JMS invocations which get (randomly)
> executed on the same worker thread. Got me?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> LieGrue,
> > >> strub
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Am 18.06.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau at gmail.com>:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi
> > >>>
> > >>> I wouldn't activate any "web" scope by default, in particular for
> async events where I think most of the time it will not be used. Next
> feature request will be to inherit the scope between async threads....and
> here I guess we agree it will not go very far.
> > >>>
> > >>> Side note: using request scope where actually a thread scope is
> needed is a pain, maybe time to add a thread scoped with an accessible
> manual activation. Would make "batches", "timers" etc easy to
> impl/integrate.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber
> > >>>
> > >>> 2015-06-18 15:10 GMT+02:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net>:
> > >>> Hi guys,
> > >>>
> > >>> We should finally decide how to manage normal scope context (other
> than application context ) in SE and during Async Event for EDR1.
> > >>>
> > >>> Having only RequestContext active during async event  as Martin
> suggest in the PR makes sense and would be consistent with its behavior
> during async EJB call.
> > >>>
> > >>> Mark asked twice to activate Request Context all the time in SE
> (making it a new Application Context). I’m not found of it, but I’ml not
> the only one to decide here.
> > >>>
> > >>> What is you feeling about this ?
> > >>>
> > >>> Antoine
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> cdi-dev mailing list
> > >>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >>>
> > >>> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses
> the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> cdi-dev mailing list
> > >>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >>>
> > >>> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses
> the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> cdi-dev mailing list
> > >> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >>
> > >> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses
> the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150619/72430d1c/attachment-0001.html 