[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-579) Extension disqualifies a jar as 'implicit bean archive'?
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-579?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Martin Kouba commented on CDI-579:
----------------------------------
Weld must follow the spec (i.e. it's not recognized as a bean archive), otherwise it
wouldn't pass the relevant TCK test:
https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi-tck/blob/1.2/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss...
[Weld
SE|http://docs.jboss.org/weld/reference/latest/en-US/html/environments.ht...]
and [Weld
Servlet|http://docs.jboss.org/weld/reference/latest/en-US/html/environmen...]
have a limited implicit bean archive support - bean archives without beans.xml descriptor
are completely ignored.
Extension disqualifies a jar as 'implicit bean archive'?
--------------------------------------------------------
Key: CDI-579
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-579
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Mark Struberg
Priority: Minor
The bean-discovery-wording is a bit odd.
This has been in since CDI-1.1
{code}
An archive which:
• contains a beans.xml file with the bean-discovery-mode of none, or,
• contains an extension and no beans.xml file is not a bean archive.
is not a bean archive.
{code}
That means even if you have an @ApplicationScoped MyService class in a jar which has a
single CDI Extension then this MyServices will *not* get picked up as CDI bean? At least
according to this wording?
Feels mega-weird to me and might conflict with the implicit beans archive definition a
few lines below.
I'm pretty sure in OWB we will pick those beans up. How does Weld behave?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)