2015-08-25 19:10 GMT+02:00 Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin(a)oracle.com>:
I'm sorry I don't understand you. I thought you were asking
about an API
which does not use annotation.
Both are needed (like websocket spec). Annotation one is nice for fully
business code and/or simple libs but relying on CDI allows to simplify the
wiring since you can reuse CDI beans under the hood ie have an implicit
connection factory if there is a single one etc which is not possible in
fully SE context.
Nigel
On 25/08/2015 18:03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> Integrating it in CDI lifecycle through an event allow CDI users to still
> use it in the right phase of the container
> boot so it is still important IMO and avoid all users to have their own
> custom listener for it -
> @Initialized(AppScoped.class). Also allow to enrich the API through the
> event itself making things smoother IMO.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <
https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <
>
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> <
https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <
>
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> <
http://www.tomitribe.com>
>
> 2015-08-25 18:58 GMT+02:00 Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin(a)oracle.com <mailto:
> nigel.deakin(a)oracle.com>>:
>
> On 25/08/2015 17:35, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
> well was thinking to both but I see it really nice to not rely
> only on annotation - and aligned with most specs
> - since
> sometimes you just want to either be able to rely on a loop or a
> custom config to register your listeners.
> Annotations
> are too rigid for such cases.
>
>
> Obviously, if users don't want to use CDI (or MDBs, which are also
> declarative), then they would use the normal JMS
> API. The existing API to register an async message listener isn't
> good enough, and we may improve it in JMS 2.1, but
> that's not something that I'd want to bother the people on cdi-dev
> with.
>
> Nigel
>
>
>