<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Stuart Douglas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stuart@baileyroberts.com.au">stuart@baileyroberts.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Does anyone have any objection to adding a complete set of AnnotationLiterals for all CDI annotations into weld-extensions?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I remember suggesting (or thinking that) at one point, so I'm for it. Though I believe Pete said that this should be in a spec rev, that any annotation (that would be referenced as a literal) should also define it's literals. That was an approach Seam has started to take, I think.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Dan</div><div> </div></div>-- <br>Dan Allen<br>Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action<br>Registered Linux User #231597<br><br><a href="http://mojavelinux.com">http://mojavelinux.com</a><br>
<a href="http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction">http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction</a><br><a href="http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen">http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen</a><br>