Re: [cdi-dev] Time to start working on CDI lite

@George, in your use case, would having basic dependency injection help ? @Antoine If the future of Java EE is modularity, then having basic dependency injection *makes* sense. Even if Java EE 8 will not make any movement towards modularity, we hope that EE9 will. In these times of micro services, you could bundle basic DI instead of the all thing. So, in my opinion, it makes sense to think of it in EE too. *"CDI lite is basic injection plus producer plus programmatic lookup plus events, so it's more than a fatter jsr 330"* So you are thinking of having events in CDI Lite ? Antonio On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 11:15 PM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Antonio Goncalves > <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > I remember talking with the JAX-RS guys (Java EE), years ago (back in > EE6), > > and their answer for not adopting CDI was "too heavy". > > I can't find an exact reference anymore, but I somewhat remember that > one of the reasons was also simply that CDI as a general solution > finished late in Java EE 6, while JAX-RS finished earlier and had all > the work for their own DI solution already done. > -- Antonio Goncalves Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Pluralsight <http://pluralsight.com/training/Authors/Details/antonio-goncalves> | Paris JUG <http://www.parisjug.org> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>