[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-352?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Mark Struberg commented on CDI-352:
-----------------------------------
Interceptors, Decorators, ProducerMethods, ProducerFields etc all only can get built up
_after_ the bean discovery is done. The reason is that enabled/disabled beans can heavily
influence the resolution. Doing this _during_ PAT would create stochastic behaviour which
depends on the order in which the classes get scanned. Thus you cannot make the classes
which need to get scanned depending on any of those mechanisms.
For Interceptors it's specially bad as there is CDI-style (@InterceptorBinding) and
EJB-style (@Interceptors). All compatibility bets are off once you leave a jar with a
beans.xml in it...
Clarify whether an interceptor/decorator enabled for a bean archive
must be packaged in a bean archive
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: CDI-352
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-352
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Components: Decorators, Interceptors
Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD
Reporter: Jozef Hartinger
Assignee: Pete Muir
Priority: Blocker
Fix For: 1.1.FD
There is a TCK test in which an archive with the beans.xml file enables an interceptor
(by listing the interceptor class name in beans.xml). The interceptor class is packaged in
another library archive which is not a bean archive. It is not clear from the
specification if an interceptor bound using interceptor bindings may only be packaged in a
bean archive or whether a CDI implementation should pull the interceptor definition based
on the declaration in the beans.xml file even if the interceptor is outside of a 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