[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-492?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-492: ------------------------------------------ [~edburns] I understand those concerns, but I think there are solution for most of them. The points given don't take into account evolutions that could be done in CDI and JSR 330 to make it possible. To take all the points and give first ideas to solve them : *backward compatibility* : introducing a qualifier for these beans (like it's done in Deltaspike to work with CDI 1.0 and 1.1) is a first lead like {{@Servlet}} to tell that these beans are owned by Servlet spec. *Dependency on CDI* ; as you know we're going to work on a new AtInject version. We could imagine having the servlet impl only be dependent on AtInject (which will stay very small : around 10 interfaces / annotations). The only thing that is missing in AtInject today is the concept of {{@Producer}} that could be added to this new version (dagger want to move its {{@Provides}} annotation to AtInject. The integration can off course be done at spec level (the worse case would be to have a dependency on CDI API). So I really don't understand Greg point. For CDI 2.0 our approach is to talk with other specs to see what they need to improve their CDI integration. So let's talk about these needs before deciding it's not doable. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.8#6338)