Correct me if i'm wrong John. Are you suggesting that SeContainerInitializer#getInstance() should return always the same initializer?  I don't remember this comment.
What would be the advantage of that instead of getting a new one at each call ?
If we want to have the SeContainerInitializer reusable we should probably add a kind of 'reset()' method.

Wdyt

Antoine

Le mer. 29 juin 2016 à 15:07, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com> a écrit :

Yes.

On Jun 29, 2016 7:47 AM, "Antoine Sabot-Durand" <antoine@sabot-durand.net> wrote:
You mean the instance of SeContainerInitializer obtained thru getInstance() ?
Le mer. 29 juin 2016 à 13:26, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com> a écrit :
Antoine,

Looks like we may have missed one of the earlier comments, about reusing the instance vs creating a new one each time.

John

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:23 AM Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net> wrote:
Hi all,

I just push changed decided in yesterday meeting to PR 290[1]. Please review them and give a +1 on it if you're ok for the merge.
Generated version of the spec is available here [2].

Antoine

_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@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.