Re: [cdi-dev] CDI spec github repo cleanup
by Werner Keil
Hi,
Speaking of GitHub, what are those GH issues that remain unsolved for a
very long time now? Are they for a next version or why did they sit there
for a few months now?
Werner
7 years, 11 months
CDI spec github repo cleanup
by Martin Kouba
Hi all,
I think it's time to clean up the CDI spec github repo. It contains
useless branches and tags (such as "revert-300-CDI-626" or
"Before_2.0-EDR1") but it does not contain e.g. "2.0-PFD" tag...
Martin
7 years, 11 months
JSR 365 officially submitted
by Antoine Sabot-Durand
Hi Team,
For your information, you'll find below a copy of the official submission
mail sent to the JCP a few minutes ago.
Again thanks to you all for the great work.
Antoine,
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Antoine Sabot-Durand* <asd(a)redhat.com>
Date: Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 5:17 PM
Subject: JSR 365 release submit
To: spec-submit(a)jcp.org
Hi,
You'll find bellow our final submission for JSR 365 (CDI 2.0). For a
possible correction after EC review our deliverables have been called PFD
or CR1 but they are in their final form. Also note that for email size
limitation or security reason we provide download links instead of
attachment for all release elements
To follow JCP release procedure find a copy of your form below filled with
our elements.
1. Confirmation that the Expert Group agrees that the JSR is ready to go
to Final Release.
EG have been notified 2 months ago of the release. This announcement
raised no disagreement. You'll find the thread in our mailing list in [1].
More recently we discussed within the EG of this current release and next
step for CDI [2]
2. The Final Spec, in pdf or zip format (please note that Javadoc files
must be zipped). This will be posted first for the Executive Committee's
review in the Final Approval Ballot, then for the community in the Final
Release when and if the ballot is approved.
Find the spec document (zipped pdf) can be downloaded here [3] as well
as zipped Javadoc [4]
3. The answers to the following export questions, supplied separately
for each file bundle you wish posted. For instance, if you provide both a
specification .pdf document and a .zip archive of javadocs, you would
provide two sets of answers to these questions.
Name of the file: *cdi2-spec.pdf.zip (specification document)*
A. Does the specification include software codes
in the following format:
Binary : Yes _______ No ___X_______
Source (compilable) : Yes _______ No _____X_____
Javadocs : Yes _______ No ____X______
B. Do the codes or the spec call on, contain, use
or demonstrate encryption technology?
Yes _________ No ____X____
If yes, please describe in detail
Name of the file: *CDI-2_0-PFD-Javadoc.zip (CDI 2.0 api javadoc)*
A. Does the specification include software codes
in the following format:
Binary : Yes _______ No ___X_______
Source (compilable) : Yes _______ No _____X_____
Javadocs : Yes ___X____ No __________
B. Do the codes or the spec call on, contain, use
or demonstrate encryption technology?
Yes _________ No ____X____
If yes, please describe in detail
Name of the file: *cdi-api-2.0-PFD.jar (CDI 2.0 api)*
A. Does the specification include software codes
in the following format:
Binary : Yes ___X____ No __________
Source (compilable) : Yes _______ No __________
Javadocs : Yes _______ No __________
B. Do the codes or the spec call on, contain, use
or demonstrate encryption technology?
Yes _________ No ____X____
If yes, please describe in detail
Name of the file: *weld-3.0.0.CR1.zip (CDI 2.0 RI)*
A. Does the specification include software codes
in the following format:
Binary : Yes ___X____ No __________
Source (compilable) : Yes _______ No __________
Javadocs : Yes _______ No __________
B. Do the codes or the spec call on, contain, use
or demonstrate encryption technology?
Yes _________ No ____X____
If yes, please describe in detail
Name of the file: *cdi-tck-2.0.0.CR1-dist.zip (CDI 2.0 TCK)*
A. Does the specification include software codes
in the following format:
Binary : Yes ___X____ No __________
Source (compilable) : Yes _______ No __________
Javadocs : Yes _______ No __________
B. Do the codes or the spec call on, contain, use
or demonstrate encryption technology?
Yes _________ No ____X____
If yes, please describe in detail
4. The Final Reference Implementation, in .zip format. This will be
posted for the Executive Committee's review in the Final Approval Ballot.
Final RI in zip format is available at [5] it bundles javadoc and API
which can also be downloaded separately at [4] and [6]
5. Confirmation that the Reference Implementation passes the Technology
Compatibility Kit.
Yes RI passes the TCK as shown in coverage doc [9]
6. The Final Technology Compatibility Kit, in .zip format. This will be
posted for the Executive Committee's review in the Final Approval Ballot.
TCK is available at [7]
7. The version number of your spec and the full legal name of your
company or organization for the specification license. The PMO hosts the
Final Approval Ballot for you, and uses Oracle's general Final Release
license unless you provide your own Final license.
Version number: 2.0 Company legal name: Red Hat, Inc.
8. Checklist transparency
• Is the schedule for the JSR publicly available, current, and updated
regularly?
Yes on our website http://cdi-spec.org
• Can the public read and/or write to a wiki for the JSR?
https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/wiki
• Is there a publicly accessible discussion board for the JSR that you
read and respond to regularly?
Yes, the mailing list whose archive and rules to subscribe are
accessible here: http://www.cdi-spec.org/mailinglist/
We are also reachable on IRC : irc://freenode.net/#cdi-dev
• Have you spoken at conferences and events about the JSR recently?
Yes : Java One, Devoxx France and Devoxx UK
• Are you using open-source processes for the development of the RI
and/or the TCK?
Our RI and TCK are developed under Apache Software License 2.0
• What are the Terms of Use required to use the collaboration tools you
have prepared to use with the Expert Group, so that prospective EG members
can judge whether they are compatible with the JSPA?
Mailing list is open to the community. Only EG member can contribute but
everybody can bring ideas or comments.
• What is the location of your publicly-accessible Issue list? In order
to enable EC members to judge whether Issues have been adequately
addressed, the list must make a clear distinction between Issues that are
still open, Issues that have been deferred, and those that are closed, and
must indicate the reason for any change of state.
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI
• What is the mechanism for the public to provide feedback on your JSR?
Mailing list, IRC and jira
• Where is the publicly-accessible document archive for your Expert
Group?
On github : https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi
• Does the Community tab for my JSR have links to and information about
all public communication mechanisms and sites for the development of my JSR?
Yes
• Do you have a Twitter account or other social networking feed which
people can follow for updates on your JSR?
Yes : @cdispec
• Which specific areas of feedback should interested community members
(such as the Adopt-a-JSR program) provide to improve the JSR (please also
post this to your Community tab)?
• Test asynchronous observersl
• Try using observer ordering
• Try CDI outside java EE with our new Java SE support
• Try new meta data configurator
• Read the spec (which has been rewritten) to find any
errors
9. The TCK Coverage Document. This is a one- to two-page summary to
assist the EC in evaluating the TCK. Please see more details in the
'Developing TCKs' section of the Spec Lead Guide
<https://jcp.org/en/resources/guide-tck>.
TCK documentation is available in [7] zip file in "doc" subfolder.
In addition, to Help EC evaluate TCK coverage we provide an HTML version
of the spec with links to TCK tests sources at [13]
10. The full text of the final licenses for the RI and TCK (and the
specification, if you are not using the standard license).
RI and TCK are under Apache License, Version 2.0 available at [10]
11. The process by which qualified individuals, educational and not for
profit organizations can access the TCK at no cost.
TCK is available at no cost under Apache License, Version 2.0 at [7]
12. The process for making first-level appeals to the tests of the TCK.
Chapter 2 of TCK doc (available in [7]) details appeals Process.
Challenges should be submitted on CDI TCK Jira [11]
13. The URL where you will make the Reference Implementation available
at Final Release.
http://download.jboss.org/weld/3.0.0.Final
14. The URL where you will make the Technology Compatibility Kit
available at Final Release.
http://download.jboss.org/cdi/tck/2.0.0.Final
15. The name and contact info of the Maintenance Lead.
The current spec lead Antoine Sabot-Durand (asd(a)redhat.org) will
continue as a maintenance lead
16. The first level TCK Appeals Process, per JCP Document section
3.2.2., which handles challenges to the tests in the TCK.
see 12.
17. An answer to the question: Can the Specification be implemented
independently of the Reference Implementation?
Yes an implementation by Apache Foundation (OpenWebbeans 2.0) is
underway [12]
18. Additional information
- CDI 2.0 file descriptor (beans.xml) has been updated and a new xsd
file [8] must be available at the following URL
*http://xmlns.jcp.org/xml/ns/javaee/beans_2_0.xsd
<http://xmlns.jcp.org/xml/ns/javaee/beans_2_0.xsd>*
- Specification document will have a dual licensing with standard JCP
click through license on jcp.org website and Apache License, Version 2.0
on official CDI website download page [14]
[1]
http://cdi-development-mailing-list.1064426.n5.nabble.com/Coming-roadmap-...
[2]
http://cdi-development-mailing-list.1064426.n5.nabble.com/CDI-2-0-is-near...
[3] http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/jcp/cdi2-spec.pdf.zip
[4] http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/jcp/CDI-2_0-PFD-Javadoc.zip
[5] http://download.jboss.org/weld/3.0.0.CR1/weld-3.0.0.CR1.zip
[6]
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/javax/enterprise/cdi-api/2.0-PFD/cdi-api-2....
[7] http://download.jboss.org/cdi/tck/2.0.0.CR1/cdi-tck-2.0.0.CR1-dist.zip
[8] https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/jcp/beans_2_0.xsd
[9]
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/jboss/cdi/tck/cdi-tck-impl/2.0.0.CR1/c...
[10] https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
[11] https://issues.jboss.org/projects/CDITCK
[12] http://openwebbeans.apache.org/openwebbeans-20-effort.html
[13] https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0-PFD/cdi-spec-with-assertions.html
[14] http://www.cdi-spec.org/download
7 years, 11 months
Re: [cdi-dev] CDI 2.0 is (nearly) over, let's start discussion on CDI 2.1
by Werner Keil
Yes, thanks Antoine for one of the more active Java EE JSRs in recent
months.
Hopefully CDI 2.0 will soon release a Public Review, like well-deserved
Spec Lead Winner Dimtry did with his 2nd JSON JSR now:
https://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/pr/jsr374/index.html
(some of the Apache-inspired ideas were also included, but don't expect
Johnzon to work with JSR-374 still built against JDK6 either, it likely
must be based on Java SE 8;-)
We may see Java EE 8 with a somewhat smaller scope and content (e.g. mostly
"Microprofile" related stuff like JSON-B 1.0, JSON-P 1.1, JAX-RS 2.1 and as
it looks like CDI 2.0, Servlet 4 or JSF 2.3, not sure about Bean Validation
2.0, depends on its ability to catch-up) but I am very confident, Java EE 8
will be feature-complete no later than JavaOne and we should see a Final at
least a year from now. Like prior ones they will keep it time-boxed, among
the reasons why Dmitry focusses on his 2 JSRs and won't take the trouble of
a config one till early 2018. So it can be added to Java EE 9 (or 8.1;-)
Werner
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:39 PM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: CDI 2.0 is (nearly) over, let's start discussion on CDI
> 2.1 (Emily Jiang)
> 2. Re: DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3 (John Ament)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 10:38:39 +0000
> From: Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] CDI 2.0 is (nearly) over, let's start
> discussion on CDI 2.1
> To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
> <OF8D0B3969.8E8C39AF-ON802580AE.003A1125-802580AE.
> 003A7D63(a)notes.na.collabserv.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Yes, thanks to Antoine for leading this great piece of work! It was so
> enjoyable to work with you all! Wonderful journey!
>
> Many thanks,
> Emily
> ===========================
> Emily Jiang
> WebSphere Application Server, CDI Development Lead
>
> MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
> Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
>
> Email: emijiang(a)uk.ibm.com
> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
>
>
>
>
> From: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>
> To: Sabot-Durand Antoine <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Date: 19/01/2017 09:32
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] CDI 2.0 is (nearly) over, let's start
> discussion on CDI 2.1
> Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
>
>
>
> And also thanks to you, Antoine, for pushing this specification forward.
>
> I think CDI-2.0 will be a corner stones of any upcoming JavaEE 8 release
> (whenever this will be).
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 17.01.2017 um 16:09 schrieb Antoine Sabot-Durand
> <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>:
> >
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > Release of CDI 2.0 is around the corner and I'd like to thank all of you
> for your help on this long adventure.
> >
> > Next CDI episode (or season) is also getting closer. We plan to continue
> our effort on CDI with a new version (probably CDI 2.1).
> >
> > This version try to focus on this main topic:
> > - Java EE 8 alignment
> > - MicroProfile enhancement
> > - Java 9 and Jigsaw support (java 8 will always be the minimum java
> version support)
> > - ...
> >
> > We also have a list of ticket that we postponed for CDI 2.1:
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-679?filter=12328671
> >
> > If you have other ideas, suggestion, wishes. Please feel free to share
> them here so that we can discuss their integration on the coming JSR
> proposal.
> >
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/
> 20170120/e021ffd4/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 12:39:34 +0000
> From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> To: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CY4PR04MB048678ED4D77D5B4664E830698710@CY4PR04MB0486.
> namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Matej,
>
>
> Ok, so now I understand better what you were trying to say in your email.
> Some context may have helped, e.g. "hey guys when compiling with Java 6 the
> compiler ignores the default flag on an interface and expects it to be
> implemented .. therefore blah blah blah..."
>
>
> I think I can push up a fix. Tks.
>
>
> John
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:04 AM
> To: John Ament
> Cc: cdi-dev
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
>
> Bad link, sorry, here is a permanent one
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0cb489f620990037c9eaf16400dd06
> de7e5a979f8c78c046ab6ff3c1(a)%3Cdev.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > Cc: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 11:01:07 AM
> > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> >
> > Hi John
> >
> > It is a known "issue" which I even sent an email about to DS mailing
> list.
> >
> > The cause is that DS compiles against Java 6 and CDI 2.0 adds a bunch of
> > *default* methods which will then not be recognized.
> > This in the end means that some DS classes (implementing interfaces from
> CDI
> > where such methods were addded) cannot be compiled as implementation
> will be
> > missing.
> >
> > The easiest solution is to compile with --source=1.8 and --target=1.8
> >
> > Here is the link to the email conversation I originally sent -
> > https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@deltaspike.apache.org:2016-12
> >
> > Regards
> > Matej
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > > To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 10:50:45 AM
> > > Subject: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just as a heads up, not sure if we knew this or not, but presently
> > > DeltaSpike
> > > does not compile with CDI 2 on the classpath. DS ships with a number of
> > > implementations of Annotated within. Was getAnnotations intended to be
> a
> > > default method?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain
> confidential,
> > > proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> > > accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> > > sender
> > > immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical
> > > and electronic copies. Thank you.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> cdi-dev Info Page - JBoss Developer<https://lists.jboss.
> org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev>
> lists.jboss.org
> List to discuss the development of CDI (the specification) To see the
> collection of prior postings to the list, visit the cdi-dev Archives.
>
>
>
> > >
> > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > > code
> > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> Apache License, Version 2.0<http://www.apache.org/
> licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html>
> www.apache.org
> Home page of The Apache Software Foundation
>
>
>
> > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > > intellectual
> > > property rights inherent in such information.
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> cdi-dev Info Page - JBoss Developer<https://lists.jboss.
> org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev>
> lists.jboss.org
> List to discuss the development of CDI (the specification) To see the
> collection of prior postings to the list, visit the cdi-dev Archives.
>
>
>
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> ________________________________
> NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
> proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/
> 20170120/ef94abd6/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/
> licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list,
> the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights
> inherent in such information.
>
> End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 74, Issue 11
> ***************************************
>
7 years, 11 months
Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
by Werner Keil
Actually it doesn't in many cases.
We started compiling the JSR 363 API and RI with J6 for support of the
largest possible number of runtimes, but Java ME 8 Embedded / CLDC 8 (based
on Java SE 7, not 8) would not accept those JARs either.
Once we built it with JDK 7 and J7 compatible settings, it worked.
Werner
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:19 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3 (John Ament)
> 2. Re: DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3 (Matej Novotny)
> 3. Re: DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3 (Matej Novotny)
> 4. Re: DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> (Romain Manni-Bucau)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 10:00:48 +0000
> From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CY4PR04MB04861BB7D244E4A22DE644DF98710@CY4PR04MB0486.
> namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Actually I just double checked, as I thought I asked this already
>
>
> https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/330#issuecomment-259986093
>
>
> So I dug a bit more. It seems that whatever was released as "2.0.Beta1"
> doesn't include the default methods. I'm not sure why but the tag wasn't
> pushed up to the repo either, so its hard to tell.
>
>
> John
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org>
> on behalf of John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:50 AM
> To: cdi-dev
> Subject: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
>
>
> All,
>
>
> Just as a heads up, not sure if we knew this or not, but presently
> DeltaSpike does not compile with CDI 2 on the classpath. DS ships with a
> number of implementations of Annotated within. Was getAnnotations
> intended to be a default method?
>
>
> John
>
>
> ________________________________
> NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
> proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
> ________________________________
> NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
> proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/
> 20170120/8e3a0698/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 05:01:07 -0500 (EST)
> From: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> To: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
> <584082592.14483061.1484906467122.JavaMail.zimbra(a)redhat.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Hi John
>
> It is a known "issue" which I even sent an email about to DS mailing list.
>
> The cause is that DS compiles against Java 6 and CDI 2.0 adds a bunch of
> *default* methods which will then not be recognized.
> This in the end means that some DS classes (implementing interfaces from
> CDI where such methods were addded) cannot be compiled as implementation
> will be missing.
>
> The easiest solution is to compile with --source=1.8 and --target=1.8
>
> Here is the link to the email conversation I originally sent -
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@deltaspike.apache.org:2016-12
>
> Regards
> Matej
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 10:50:45 AM
> > Subject: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Just as a heads up, not sure if we knew this or not, but presently
> DeltaSpike
> > does not compile with CDI 2 on the classpath. DS ships with a number of
> > implementations of Annotated within. Was getAnnotations intended to be a
> > default method?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
> > proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> > accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> sender
> > immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical
> > and electronic copies. Thank you.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 05:04:02 -0500 (EST)
> From: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> To: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
> <965490869.14483507.1484906642515.JavaMail.zimbra(a)redhat.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> Bad link, sorry, here is a permanent one
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0cb489f620990037c9eaf16400dd06
> de7e5a979f8c78c046ab6ff3c1(a)%3Cdev.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > Cc: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 11:01:07 AM
> > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> >
> > Hi John
> >
> > It is a known "issue" which I even sent an email about to DS mailing
> list.
> >
> > The cause is that DS compiles against Java 6 and CDI 2.0 adds a bunch of
> > *default* methods which will then not be recognized.
> > This in the end means that some DS classes (implementing interfaces from
> CDI
> > where such methods were addded) cannot be compiled as implementation
> will be
> > missing.
> >
> > The easiest solution is to compile with --source=1.8 and --target=1.8
> >
> > Here is the link to the email conversation I originally sent -
> > https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@deltaspike.apache.org:2016-12
> >
> > Regards
> > Matej
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > > To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 10:50:45 AM
> > > Subject: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just as a heads up, not sure if we knew this or not, but presently
> > > DeltaSpike
> > > does not compile with CDI 2 on the classpath. DS ships with a number of
> > > implementations of Annotated within. Was getAnnotations intended to be
> a
> > > default method?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain
> confidential,
> > > proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> > > accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> > > sender
> > > immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> physical
> > > and electronic copies. Thank you.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >
> > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > > code
> > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > > intellectual
> > > property rights inherent in such information.
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 11:18:59 +0100
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> To: Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Message-ID:
> <CACLE=7OE8qmL5gdjhH_+HGTy93ziqSqACQM9xCLaryXzL+
> qgYw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Is it still on 2.0? J6 code should still run for backward compatibility.
>
> Le 20 janv. 2017 11:05, "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com> a ?crit :
>
> > Bad link, sorry, here is a permanent one
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0cb489f620990037c9eaf16400dd06
> > de7e5a979f8c78c046ab6ff3c1(a)%3Cdev.deltaspike.apache.org%3E
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > > Cc: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 11:01:07 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> > >
> > > Hi John
> > >
> > > It is a known "issue" which I even sent an email about to DS mailing
> > list.
> > >
> > > The cause is that DS compiles against Java 6 and CDI 2.0 adds a bunch
> of
> > > *default* methods which will then not be recognized.
> > > This in the end means that some DS classes (implementing interfaces
> from
> > CDI
> > > where such methods were addded) cannot be compiled as implementation
> > will be
> > > missing.
> > >
> > > The easiest solution is to compile with --source=1.8 and --target=1.8
> > >
> > > Here is the link to the email conversation I originally sent -
> > > https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@deltaspike.apache.org:2016-12
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Matej
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "John Ament" <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
> > > > To: "cdi-dev" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 10:50:45 AM
> > > > Subject: [cdi-dev] DeltaSpike not compiling with CDI 2.0/Weld 3
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Just as a heads up, not sure if we knew this or not, but presently
> > > > DeltaSpike
> > > > does not compile with CDI 2 on the classpath. DS ships with a number
> of
> > > > implementations of Annotated within. Was getAnnotations intended to
> be
> > a
> > > > default method?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain
> > confidential,
> > > > proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
> > > > accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
> > > > sender
> > > > immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
> > physical
> > > > and electronic copies. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > > >
> > > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses
> the
> > > > code
> > > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other
> ideas
> > > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > > > intellectual
> > > > property rights inherent in such information.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >
> > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code
> > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > intellectual
> > > property rights inherent in such information.
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/
> > licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list,
> > the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights
> > inherent in such information.
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/
> 20170120/1fc28360/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/
> licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list,
> the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights
> inherent in such information.
>
> End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 74, Issue 10
> ***************************************
>
7 years, 11 months
