5:13 p.m.
My point is that it is not standardized.
Another point is, that almost no app server provides an option to declare this inside the
app archive (WAR). You need to set it through app server configuration, which is often
error prone, if not unacceptable in certain scenarios.
S pozdravom,
Ondrej Mihályi
----- Pôvodná správa -----
Od: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com>
Odoslané: 15.3.2016 23:06
Komu: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de>; "Romain Manni-Bucau"
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>; "Ondrej Mihályi"
<ondrej.mihalyi(a)gmail.com>
Kópia: "cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org" <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Predmet: Re: [cdi-dev] Standrdization of option to disable CDI for all appmodules in
single file?
But if its an app server specific thing, I would expect the app server to support it no?
Wildfly has a config, glassfish had a config last I looked (was a long while ago).
John
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 2:06 PM Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
In Apache OpenWebBeans we have a mode
org.apache.webbeans.scanBeansXmlOnly
See http://openwebbeans.apache.org/owbconfig.html
Maybe Weld could implement something similar?
LieGrue,
strub
On Tuesday, 15 March 2016, 18:20, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Ondrej,
would it be possible to push it on ee list too? Scanning is not limited to CDI and at EE
level EJB, Servlet etc... can get the exact same issue. A global scanning config would
benefit the whole platform and CDI could just reuse it when not in EE.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau | Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber
2016-03-15 18:12 GMT+01:00 Ondrej Mihályi <ondrej.mihalyi(a)gmail.com>:
Hi,
>
>
>Some Java EE 6 apps still have issues with implicit scanning, even
though they
don't use guava and sometimes it is not possible to put
beans.xml file into the problematic JARs. People are having issues with this when
migrating to Glassfish 4 or Payara from Glassfish 3.
>
>
>With Payara server, we are thinking of
creating an option in server-specific app
descriptor to disable CDI
completely either for whole application or just for specific modules.
>
> I think it would make sense to consider some standardization of this approach in CDI
2, as I've seen issues with this on stackoverflow also with other app servers. Or is
it already planned?
>
>
>Ondrej
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.