Re: [cdi-dev] [servlet-spec users] [jsr369-experts] [116-CDIRelatedBeansInServletSpec] PROPOSAL
Oh and before I get misinterpreted: it was pretty soon clear to all the EG that we need 2
Scopes. The question was just whether the existing CDI-1.0 @ApplicationScoped annotation
should be the 1-per-EAR or the 1-per-Module.
LieGrue,
strub
On Friday, 21 November 2014, 20:33, arjan tijms
<arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
>> "logical app" what's wrong with @ApplicationScoped
especially for JMS?
>
> We had this discussion quite some time ago. If you like to have fun then
read up CDI-129 ;)
> It basically boils down that the majority of CDI EG members wanted to
behave @ApplicationScoped as "1 per EAR", so we miss the "1 per
Module/WebApp".
This has indeed been discussed before and remains a problematic issue.
Don't want to go too much off-topic here, but the scope of extensions
and @Named within an EAR with multiple wars suffers from a similar
issue. See e.g.
http://balusc.blogspot.com/2013/10/cdi-behaved-unexpectedly-in-ear-so.html
Kind regards,
Arjan