Re: [cdi-dev] cdi-dev Digest, Vol 57, Issue 33

Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org You can reach the person managing the list at cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Time to start working on CDI lite (Romain Manni-Bucau) 2. Re: Time to start working on CDI lite (Werner Keil) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 16:02:32 +0200 From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Time to start working on CDI lite To: Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; Message-ID: <CACLE= 7Mu5mMB3tFWLtPxNXRpKrR82xKku5saFB9it3n-8RU1aQ(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Lite can have several definition, let's try to list them up if it can help: - binary size: for me until 3M for an app it is "Lite" - features number: the whole IoC set of feature is light since you almost always need it, it means you can do lighter but it wouldnt be used - check spring, who uses only spring-ioc and not context or more? - features complexity: sure we are not light here but supporting scopes already breaks "Lite-ness" IMO so not a real issue So my view is CDI "SE" is light enough - as a spec and spec can't affect implementations so seems the fight is not on the right side to me. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber <http://www.tomitribe.com> 2015-08-30 15:57 GMT+02:00 Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com >: > It's funny, I feel I'm in Rod Johnson shoes back in Java EE 6 where he > forked 330 because he found CDI was doing too much ;o) > > For me, "CDI Lite" was just basic dependency injection. The fact that CDI > can now run on SE (like JPA....), is good... but for me it has nothing to > do with Light : it's the entire thing that can bootstrap in SE. Good. > > So what is Lite for you guys ? > > Antonio > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau < rmannibucau(a)gmail.com > > wrote: > >> 2015-08-30 15:22 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt;: >> >>> Personally, I'm not in favor of a slimmed down runtime. It was tried >>> with EJB, but never implemented properly (most implementations that support >>> EJB-lite actually support the entire thing, except for deprecated stuff). >>> >>> >> +1, most of CDI is basic and quickly any light version will miss events >> or other thing - in particular in maintaining micro services from >> experience. Size of an implementation can easily be < 1M so not sure it >> would bring anything. Only important point is what Antoine started to do ie >> ensuring EE and SE parts are clearly identified and split in the spec. >> >> >>> I think if we define SE properly we won't have a need for this. >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 8:07 AM Antonio Goncalves < >>> antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> @Antoine, so which content do you see in CDI Lite ? Are you sure about >>>> events ? >>>> >>>> I'm in favor of a "fatter" 330 that would have : >>>> >>>> - @Inject : already there >>>> - @Qualifier : already there >>>> - >>>> *Producers and disposers * >>>> - >>>> *Programatic lookup * >>>> - *Java SE Bootstrap* >>>> >>>> When you say "*The goal here is not to propose a new EE profile but a >>>> subspec*", 330 could already be seen as a subspec. If you put events >>>> apparts, what would be missing in this list in your point of view ? And >>>> what obstacles do you see in archieving this ? >>>> >>>> To boostrap CDI we have a CDIProvider, why not having an >>>> InjectionProvider just to bootstrap 330 (then, CDIProvider could extend >>>> InjectionProvider, so it bootstraps the all thing) ? >>>> >>>> Antonio >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand < >>>> antoine(a)sabot-durand.net&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yes Arjan, I think it's the first reason. We really should work with >>>>> them to understand what should be added to CDI 2.0 to have it as a first >>>>> citizen DI in their spec. >>>>> >>>>> Le sam. 29 ao?t 2015 ? 23:15, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com&gt; a >>>>> ?crit : >>>>> >>>>>> 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> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>> >> >> > > > -- > 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> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150830/db8e0477/at... End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 57, Issue 33 ***************************************