Re: [cdi-dev] [servlet-spec users] [jsr369-experts] [116-CDIRelatedBeansInServletSpec] PROPOSAL

Mark added cdi-dev to the recipients list, but I am not subscribed to that (please don't add me, I rely on JJ to keep me up to date!), so this may bounce there. Also, Mark, there is no <jsr369-users(a)servlet-spec.java.net&gt;. The users lists are re-used from JSR to JSR for each technology. Thus, I have put users(a)servlet-spec.java.net in place of the non-existent list. On Wednesday, 19 November 2014, 19:40, Edward Burns <edward.burns(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: [...] EB> section 15.5.15 "Contexts and Dependency Injection for Java EE EB> requirements". EB> The CDI spec is trying to trim itself down [...] EB> CDI Spec section 3.8 [1] places some requirements on CDI implementations EB> when running with Servlet. To better suit user desires for modularity EB> these requirements are better met by moving them to the Servlet EB> spec. [...] EB> To put these items in the Servlet spec, we may have to couch them in EB> terms similar to, "when running in an environment that also supports EB> CDI...". EB> PROPOSAL: EB> Include language in our spec section 15.5.15 which allows the CDI spec EB> to remove their language while preserving desired existing user EB> functionality. [...] MS> I'm not quite sure that it's worth it. The @RequestScoped and MS> @SessionScoped are already in the CDI spec package. And as you know MS> we must not split packages between different specs. AT> I don't think it's about moving those scope annotations, but just AT> about the injection of HttpServletRequest, HttpSession and AT> ServletContext. Granted. The proposal does not touch those. Mark was just questioning if it was worth it. I am skeptical myself, but am responsive to community input. MS> It would feel quite unnatural to have annotations in the CDI APIs MS> but the description in the servlet spec. [...] I'll trust that Antoine Sabot-Durand (ASD) will take your reservations into account when deciding to press on with CDI-492-FobStuffToServlet or not. MS> What we probably could add (regardless whether on CDI or Servlet MS> side) is kind of a @WebAppScoped. This is really missing atm. But MS> again this must also be active in e.g. JMS invocations which form MS> kind a 'logical app'. That's a whole new thing, again for ASD to consider. As you observe, it doesn't belong in Servlet because JMS can also use it. Ed -- | edward.burns(a)oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017