[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-424) Add validation of contextuals passed to a context object for a passivating scope
by Martin Kouba (JIRA)
Martin Kouba created CDI-424:
--------------------------------
Summary: Add validation of contextuals passed to a context object for a passivating scope
Key: CDI-424
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-424
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Reporter: Martin Kouba
6.6.1 Passivation capable beans:
{quote}
An implementation of Contextual that is not a bean is passivation capable if it implements both PassivationCapable and Serializable.
{quote}
6.6.4 Passivating scopes
{quote}
A passivating scope requires that implementations of Contextual passed to any context object for the scope are passivation capable.
{quote}
Theoretically an implementation of Contextual that is not a bean may be passed to a context object of a passivating scope (e.g. @SessionScoped). The spec should specify what happens then. Apparently the container should detect the problem and treat it as a deployment problem.
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-422) Wrong example for event qualifier types with members
by Martin Kouba (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Martin Kouba commented on CDI-422:
----------------------------------
I've updated the pull request with proposed changes.
> Wrong example for event qualifier types with members
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-422
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Events
> Reporter: Martin Kouba
> Assignee: Martin Kouba
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: CDI_spec_chge
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> The following snippet in "10.2.2 Event qualifier types with members" is wrong:
> {code}
> public void login() {
> final User user = ...;
> loggedInEvent.fire( new LoggedInEvent(user),
> new RoleQualifier() { public String value() { return user.getRole(); } );
> }
> {code}
> {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method does not have qualifiers param. The example should either use {{Event.select(Annotation...)}} along with {{Event.fire()}} or {{BeanManager.fireEvent(Object, Annotation...)}}.
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-376) BeanManager#getProducerFactory return type differs between API and spec
by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-376?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Work on CDI-376 started by Antoine Sabot-Durand.
> BeanManager#getProducerFactory return type differs between API and spec
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-376
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-376
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Javadoc and API
> Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD
> Reporter: Mark Struberg
> Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: CDI_api_chge, CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> return type differs between API and spec wording for both BeanManager#getProducerFactory methods.
> In API we have
> {{public <X> ProducerFactory<X> getProducerFactory(AnnotatedMethod<? super X> method, Bean<X> declaringBean);}}
> While in spec (section 11.3.22 )we have
> {{public <X> ProducerFactory<? super X> getProducerFactory(AnnotatedMethod<? super X> method, Bean<X> declaringBean);}}
> They differ in the return type:
> {{ProducerFactory<X>}} vs {{ProducerFactory<? super X>}}
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-376) BeanManager#getProducerFactory return type differs between API and spec
by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-376?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Antoine Sabot-Durand reassigned CDI-376:
----------------------------------------
Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand
> BeanManager#getProducerFactory return type differs between API and spec
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-376
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-376
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Javadoc and API
> Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD
> Reporter: Mark Struberg
> Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: CDI_api_chge, CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> return type differs between API and spec wording for both BeanManager#getProducerFactory methods.
> In API we have
> {{public <X> ProducerFactory<X> getProducerFactory(AnnotatedMethod<? super X> method, Bean<X> declaringBean);}}
> While in spec (section 11.3.22 )we have
> {{public <X> ProducerFactory<? super X> getProducerFactory(AnnotatedMethod<? super X> method, Bean<X> declaringBean);}}
> They differ in the return type:
> {{ProducerFactory<X>}} vs {{ProducerFactory<? super X>}}
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-392) Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called
by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-392:
-------------------------------------
Comment: was deleted
(was: I guess this ambiguous behavior )
> Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-392
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Clarification
> Reporter: Matus Abaffy
> Assignee: Mark Struberg
> Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> The current version of spec. states (under 11.3. The BeanManager object): "Any operation of BeanManager may be called at any time during the execution of the application."
> This sentence is likely to be misinterpreted (see WELD-1453). Pointing out that BeanManager's methods can be called (without causing exception) just after AfterDeploymentValidation event is fired might be helpful.
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-392) Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called
by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-392:
------------------------------------------
I guess this ambiguous behavior
> Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-392
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Clarification
> Reporter: Matus Abaffy
> Assignee: Mark Struberg
> Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> The current version of spec. states (under 11.3. The BeanManager object): "Any operation of BeanManager may be called at any time during the execution of the application."
> This sentence is likely to be misinterpreted (see WELD-1453). Pointing out that BeanManager's methods can be called (without causing exception) just after AfterDeploymentValidation event is fired might be helpful.
--
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
10 years, 9 months
[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-397) Clarify Section 6.6.3 regarding singletons
by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-397?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ]
Work on CDI-397 started by Antoine Sabot-Durand.
> Clarify Section 6.6.3 regarding singletons
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-397
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-397
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Clarification
> Affects Versions: 1.1.FD
> Reporter: Jozef Hartinger
> Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix
> Fix For: 1.2 Proposed
>
>
> The section 6.6.3 Passivation capable dependencies states:
> {quote}
> all singleton beans are passivation capable dependencies
> {quote}
> Clearly the specification intents to address *singleton session beans* but the current wording does not make that explicit and users confuse this line and consider javax.inject.Singleton-scoped beans also to be passivation capable dependencies.
> The spec should instead say that:
> {quote}
> all singleton *session* beans are passivation capable dependencies
> {quote}
--
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
10 years, 9 months