11:13 a.m.
+1 for 1)
Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but there
are existing dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most notably
JSR-330.
Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under 250 matter at
all,
if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping" libraries proposed by
Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by OpenJDK architects
including Mark Reinhold with the EC. So far no real progress on that, but
till this JSR goes final or EE 8 it could work to get dependencies a bit
lighter, too.
It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g. to
finally make use of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but
seems much easier here than e.g. bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
Werner
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
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: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine(a)sabot-durand.net)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
adding a parameter in @Observes
To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763(a)sabot-durand.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote +1)
pros:
- more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI
(Interceptors, decorators, Alternatives)
- more Java EE consistent
cons:
- time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update to
support parameter for target)
- as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have to
add the jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which will
make it a little less light)
2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer
(vote -1)
pros:
- works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other
specs modification)
- avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
cons:
- less Java EE spirit
- could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors,
Decorators and Alternatives.
????????????????????
Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes will be
binding
How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for
parameter in @Observes)
Vote will be closed in 72 hours
12:33 p.m.
New subject: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a parameter in @Observes
I would be +1 if we can get a commitment to update the version of JSR-250 shipped in the
JDK updated as well, otherwise -1
On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:13, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
+1 for 1)
Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but there are existing
dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most notably JSR-330.
Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under 250 matter at
all, if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping" libraries proposed by
Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by OpenJDK architects including Mark
Reinhold with the EC. So far no real progress on that, but till this JSR goes final or EE
8 it could work to get dependencies a bit lighter, too.
It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g. to finally make use
of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but seems much easier here than e.g.
bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
Werner
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
<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 <mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev-owner@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: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
adding a parameter in @Observes
To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763@sabot-durand.net>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote +1)
pros:
- more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI (Interceptors,
decorators, Alternatives)
- more Java EE consistent
cons:
- time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update to support
parameter for target)
- as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have to add the jsr250
jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which will make it a little less light)
2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer (vote -1)
pros:
- works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other specs
modification)
- avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
cons:
- less Java EE spirit
- could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors, Decorators and
Alternatives.
????????????????????
Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes will be binding
How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for parameter in
@Observes)
Vote will be closed in 72 hours
_______________________________________________
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.
12:40 p.m.
New subject: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a parameter in @Observes
AFAIK that is not part of the JDK, thus it should make it easier to ask
them for a MR, last happened about a year ago:
https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I would be +1 if we can get a commitment to update the version of
JSR-250
shipped in the JDK updated as well, otherwise -1
On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:13, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com> wrote:
+1 for 1)
Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but there
are existing dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most notably
JSR-330.
Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under 250 matter at
all,
if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping" libraries proposed by
Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by OpenJDK architects
including Mark Reinhold with the EC. So far no real progress on that, but
till this JSR goes final or EE 8 it could work to get dependencies a bit
lighter, too.
It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g. to
finally make use of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but
seems much easier here than e.g. bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
Werner
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
> 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: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
> 2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
> parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> 3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> 4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
> 19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
> Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine(a)sabot-durand.net)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
> From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
> Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
> adding a parameter in @Observes
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763(a)sabot-durand.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
>
> 1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote +1)
> pros:
> - more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI
> (Interceptors, decorators, Alternatives)
> - more Java EE consistent
>
> cons:
> - time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update to
> support parameter for target)
> - as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have to
> add the jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which will
> make it a little less light)
>
> 2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer
> (vote -1)
> pros:
> - works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other
> specs modification)
> - avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
>
> cons:
> - less Java EE spirit
> - could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors,
> Decorators and Alternatives.
>
> ????????????????????
>
> Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes will
> be binding
> How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for
> parameter in @Observes)
> Vote will be closed in 72 hours
>
_______________________________________________
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.
12:43 p.m.
New subject: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a parameter in @Observes
No, it is part of the JDK - check out the packages available in your IDE, or look at the
Javadoc. http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary...
<http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary...
We can get an MR no problem, however it is critical IMO that this update makes it in the
JDK in a timely fashion to avoid people having to use the endorsed dir to upgrade JSR-250
(Antoine mentioned you have to add it as a dependency, but it’s worse - you have to add it
to the endorsed dir).
On 28 Oct 2014, at 11:40, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
AFAIK that is not part of the JDK, thus it should make it easier to ask them for a MR,
last happened about a year ago: https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250
<https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com
<mailto:pmuir@redhat.com>> wrote:
I would be +1 if we can get a commitment to update the version of JSR-250 shipped in the
JDK updated as well, otherwise -1
> On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:13, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com
<mailto:werner.keil@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> +1 for 1)
>
> Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but there are
existing dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most notably JSR-330.
>
> Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under 250
matter at all, if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping" libraries
proposed by Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by OpenJDK architects
including Mark Reinhold with the EC. So far no real progress on that, but till this JSR
goes final or EE 8 it could work to get dependencies a bit lighter, too.
>
> It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g. to finally make
use of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but seems much easier here than e.g.
bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
>
> Werner
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>> wrote:
> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
<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
<mailto:cdi-dev-request@lists.jboss.org>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev-owner@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: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
> 2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
> parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> 3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> 4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
> 19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
> Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
> From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net>>
> Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
> adding a parameter in @Observes
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763(a)sabot-durand.net
<mailto:ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763@sabot-durand.net>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
>
> 1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote +1)
> pros:
> - more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI (Interceptors,
decorators, Alternatives)
> - more Java EE consistent
>
> cons:
> - time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update to support
parameter for target)
> - as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have to add the
jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which will make it a little less
light)
>
> 2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer (vote -1)
> pros:
> - works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other specs
modification)
> - avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
>
> cons:
> - less Java EE spirit
> - could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors, Decorators
and Alternatives.
>
> ????????????????????
>
> Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes will be binding
> How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for parameter in
@Observes)
> Vote will be closed in 72 hours
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
<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
<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.
4:11 p.m.
New subject: [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a parameter in @Observes
I think what Werner meant is that while JSR-250 is part of SE there is still no JavaSE
version available (afaik) which ships the 'new' @Priority annotation at all. Means
right now there is NO classpath clash for this class and people have to manually add some
common-annotations-api-1.2.jar to their application anyway.
With other words: it looks like there is no technical problem with enhancing @Priority at
all. So let's do just that.
LieGrue,
strub
On Tuesday, 28 October 2014, 12:44, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
No, it is part of the JDK - check out the packages available in your IDE, or look at the
Javadoc. http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/annotation/package-summary...
We can get an MR no problem, however it is critical IMO that this update makes it in the
JDK in a timely fashion to avoid people having to use the endorsed dir to upgrade JSR-250
(Antoine mentioned you have to add it as a dependency, but it’s worse - you have to add it
to the endorsed dir).
On 28 Oct 2014, at 11:40, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>AFAIK that is not part of the JDK, thus it should make it easier to ask them for a MR,
last happened about a year ago: https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=250
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>I would be +1 if we can get a commitment to update the version of JSR-250 shipped in
the JDK updated as well, otherwise -1
>>
>>
>>On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:13, Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>+1 for 1)
>>>
>>>
>>>Unlike @Inject the Maven JAR for JSR-250 is a bit bigger (~20kb) but there are
existing dependencies that are not part of the JDK, most notably JSR-330.
>>>
>>>
>>>Not sure, if subpackages like "security" or "sql" under
250 matter at all, if not, we could explore if the ideas for "stripping"
libraries proposed by Oracle may also work for SE/EE. This was discussed by OpenJDK
architects including Mark Reinhold with the EC. So far no real progress on that, but till
this JSR goes final or EE 8 it could work to get dependencies a bit lighter, too.
>>>
>>>
>>>It is likely, some annotation JSRs not just 250 need overhaul, e.g. to finally
make use of JSR-308, so an MR for 250 could be cumbersome, but seems much easier here than
e.g. bringing JSR-305 back to life;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Werner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:58 AM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org>
wrote:
>>>
>>>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: microbenchmark for CDI performance (Mohan Radhakrishnan)
>>>> 2. [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of adding a
>>>> parameter in @Observes (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
>>>> 3. No meeting tomorrow (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
>>>> 4. Updated Invitation: CDI weekly meeting @ Weekly from 18:00 to
>>>> 19:00 on Wednesday except Wed 1 Oct 18:00, Wed 15 Oct 18:00 or
>>>> Wed 29 Oct 18:00 (ASD Perso) (antoine(a)sabot-durand.net)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>Message: 2
>>>>Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:56:14 +0100
>>>>From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
>>>>Subject: [cdi-dev] [VOTE] Using @Priority to order events instead of
>>>> adding a parameter in @Observes
>>>>To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>>>>Message-ID: <ECAAD9B3-649C-4856-BB24-82AB9EF41763(a)sabot-durand.net>
>>>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>>>
>>>>To add events ordering feature we have two choices:
>>>>
>>>>1) Use @Priority from common annotation specification (JSR-250) (vote
+1)
>>>>pros:
>>>>- more consistent with other ordering mechanism we already have in CDI
(Interceptors, decorators, Alternatives)
>>>>- more Java EE consistent
>>>>
>>>>cons:
>>>>- time consumed in JSR 250 MR participation (@Priority must be update to
support parameter for target)
>>>>- as @Priority is not part of Java SE, CDI light on java SE will have to
add the jsr250 jar as dependency only to have this annotation (which will make it a little
less light)
>>>>
>>>>2) Add a parameter to @Observes annotation to give order to an observer
(vote -1)
>>>>pros:
>>>>- works out of the box (we can add this property without ask for other
specs modification)
>>>>- avoid two annotations to declare an ordered observer (simpler usage)
>>>>
>>>>cons:
>>>>- less Java EE spirit
>>>>- could be seen as an inconsistency with the way we order Interceptors,
Decorators and Alternatives.
>>>>
>>>>????????????????????
>>>>
>>>>Who can vote? Everybody registered to this ML can vote. All votes will be
binding
>>>>How to vote? Answer this mail and vote +1 (for @Priority) 0 or -1(for
parameter in @Observes)
>>>>Vote will be closed in 72 hours
>>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>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.
3461
days inactive
3461
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Mark Struberg -
Pete Muir -
Werner Keil