[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-245?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Mark Struberg commented on CDI-245:
-----------------------------------
+1 for not allowing field injection into cdi extensions.
I do not get the other stuff. Of course an injected Extension is only a 'reference.
But effectively the only difference is Bean#create() which doesn't create anything.
For the 'injection' purpose the 2 cases are identical.
My main point is: before we introduce anything new (BM#getExtensions(), etc) to allow
inter-extension communication, we shall do it the CDI way. And Extensions are already
available for injection in CDI-1.0 - just not at boot time yet. We might easily add this
without imo.
Promote the right way how extensions should communicate with each
other during container initialization
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: CDI-245
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-245
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Affects Versions: 1.0, 1.1.EDR
Reporter: Martin Kouba
Assignee: Pete Muir
Fix For: 1.1.PRD
This is not clear right now. The spec allows (does not forbid) extensions to fire regular
events via {{BeanManager}} and I believe this should be _the right way_. See also CDI-109
discussion. However we should also state that extensions _may not fire container lifecycle
events_ as this could lead to unexpected results (and it's pretty broken imho).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira