September 2011 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-136) Assumption all @Stateful beans should be passivation capable

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-136?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-136: ------------------------------- https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/40 > Assumption all @Stateful beans should be passivation capable > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-136 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-136 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Beans, Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: David Blevins > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > > Stateful session beans in transactions can't be passivated and shouldn't have passivation requirements either, like request scope. > Stateful beans can be any scope. They are the Bertie Bott's Every Flavor Beans of EJB. It's too big of a brush to say that passivation is always required. That's the part we need to fix. > Stateful session beans that do passivate are pretty rare. They should be assumed to be @NormalScope unless otherwise specified. > The user should be able to say if they want passivation validation on their stateful bean and dependencies. > We should at a minimum change the related language of the spec to be "For every bean which declares a passivating scope, and for every stateful session bean ***that requires passivation***, " and discuss how to determine that an SFSB requires passivation. > From the EJB perspective this has always been a container detail, but we could have a rule in CDI that states the checks are not enforced unless the bean class explicitly implements java.io.Serializable. Alternatively we could make a generic @PassivationScoped annotation for other architectures that have flexible scopes and support passivation concepts. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-86) Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments

by John Ament (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] John Ament commented on CDI-86: ------------------------------- Hmmm I missed that in 1.0. Do you mean MDB's or any message listener within a CDI enabled JMS object? E.g. a message listener created that is bound using addMessageListener on a consumer? Also, would you be referring to a CDI enabled message listener (e.g. @Inject @MessageType("A") MessageListener ml; ) ? This one I know doesn't work in AS7. > Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-86 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-86) Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-86: ------------------------------ John, take a look at section 6.7.1 in the 1.0 spec and you will see that CDI requires the request scope is active for JMS message listener message delivery. If the request context is initialized specifically for this, then we will will fire a CDI event with qualifiers @Request @Initialized, and the event should have a payload (in servlet it's a ServletRequestEvent which allows the observer access to the context of the request). What should it be for JMS message listeners, if anything? > Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-86 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-86) Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments

by John Ament (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] John Ament commented on CDI-86: ------------------------------- Pete, I'm curious about the message listener comment in the commit message. > Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-86 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-86) Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-86: ------------------------------ Jozef, could you review the changes I've made and check you feel it sufficiently specifies your scenario? > Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-86 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-86) Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-86: ------------------------------ Pull request at https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/39 > Support firing general purpose lifecycle events in Java EE environments > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-86 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-86 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Pete Muir > Assignee: Pete Muir > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

Process(Synthetic)AnnotatedType fired for beans added via BBD

by Pete Muir

https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-33 and pull request https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/38 I would like feedback as this is means that extensions written for 1.0 will suddenly start receiving more events, however I am reluctant to fire a totally separate event for synthetic types as it screws up the api long term.

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] Commented: (CDI-33) fire ProcessAnnotatedType for AnnotatedTypes added via BBD.addAnnotatedType()

by Pete Muir (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-33?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sys... ] Pete Muir commented on CDI-33: ------------------------------ https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/38 > fire ProcessAnnotatedType for AnnotatedTypes added via BBD.addAnnotatedType() > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-33 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-33 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Feature Request > Components: Portable Extensions > Affects Versions: 1.0 > Reporter: Jozef Hartinger > Assignee: Pete Muir > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.1 (Confirmed) > > > Currently, the ProcessAnnotatedType event is fired for AnnotatedTypes discovered in a BDA only. However, portable extensions are allowed to register other AnnotatedTypes using addAnnotatedType() during the BeforeBeanDiscovery phase. For these AnnotatedTypes, the ProcessAnnotatedType event is not fired. > However, an extension A may register an AnnotatedType X via addAnnotatedType() and an extension B might want to react on the presence of AnnotatedType X. Therefore, it would be great to have the ProcessAnnotatedType fired also for AnnotatedTypes registered programatically in the BeforeBeanDiscovery phase. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

Schedule update

by Pete Muir

All, I would like to get a snapshot of the spec out there for JavaOne - we probably won't have time to register this as an early draft review, but we can label it as a proposed early draft review or something ;-) I'll be working on a few changes as a result over the next week or so. Pete

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

Enum injection

by Pete Muir

I've written up the spec changes for https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-127 as https://github.com/jboss/cdi/pull/37 - please review :-) There is an open question here. Currently I've defined it as being non-portable to inject into an enum defined in a shared library, as the behavior when injecting contextual instances becomes complex (as this is essentially static injection). Please let me know if this is going to cause a problem for you.

14 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev September 2011