+1 for the feature itself which allows to keep some basic backward
compatibility (but I would add a way to notify the user of a - single -
warning if this feature is actually needed and used)
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <
2016-02-09 17:37 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>:
-1
Le mar. 9 févr. 2016 à 17:36, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
antoine(a)sabot-durand.net> a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> There have been a lot of discussion around CDI-527 in the last weeks:
>
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-527
>
> Mark proposed a PR:
>
https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/271
>
> But we don't agree on adding this feature to the spec.
> This vote is to decide if we should add this feature at the spec level
> now, or not.
> Should we vote this feature down, that won't mean it will be completely
> dropped: it could be implemented as non portable feature in both Spec or
> even be included as experimental feature in the spec (in annexes) as
> describe in the PR comments
> Vote starts now, only vote from EG members are binding (but you can give
> your opinion if not part of the EG) and will last 72 hours.
>
> You vote with the following values:
> +1 : I'm favorable for adding this feature in the spec
> -1 : I'm against adding this feature in the spec
> 0 : I don't care
>
> Thank you for your attention and your vote.
>
> Antoine Sabot-Durand
>
_______________________________________________
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.