<p dir="ltr">For me it is 100% the same as ee where you have the same issues so keeping them aligned is better IMO. That said configuring globally the scanning would be nice.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Le 1 mars 2015 15:54, "John D. Ament" <<a href="mailto:john.d.ament@gmail.com">john.d.ament@gmail.com</a>> a écrit :<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">All,<div><br></div><div>I'd like to propose in my doc changes for CDI-26 that if a classpath entry does not contain a META-INF/beans.xml that it is treated as if it were bean-discovery-mode=none, e.g. no beans will be scanned in that entry. (BTW, I'm using classpath entry rather than archive in the document to account for cases where someone does -cp "./classes:./extra-classes:./lib/*" to define their classpath)</div><div><br></div><div>It's a bit different than how EE works, but I could imagine it causing fewer headaches when running on SE classpaths.</div><div><br></div><div>Any thoughts/comments?</div><div><br></div><div>John</div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
cdi-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
<br>
Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html" target="_blank">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br></blockquote></div>