[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-470?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Pete Muir commented on CDI-470:
-------------------------------
It only applies to the current package, and not to subpackages. Taxonomically, Java does
not define subpackages as a type of package, but as a unique indentity - take a look the
Java Language Specification. However, in common usage, this definition has become blurred,
so I think we could add a note to the spec here, that makes this point.
Recursive vetoing is possibly interesting, but note that the note
{quote}
When placed on package, all beans in the package are prevented from being installed. If
packages are split across jars, non-portable behavior results. An application can prevent
packages being split across jars by sealing the package
{quote}
would need to apply to subpackage. IOW all packages and subpackages must be in the same
JAR. Java provides no way to enforce this unfortunately.
Clarify @Vetoed on recursive package
------------------------------------
Key: CDI-470
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-470
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Components: Beans
Affects Versions: 1.2.Final
Reporter: Antonio Goncalves
It's not clear in the specification is {{@Vetoed}} only apply to the current package
or subpackages as well. This has been addressed on [CDI-299] but not solved. Either, we
make it clearer in the spec that it only addresses the current package and not
subpackages, or we could have a boolean, such as {{recursive}} :
{code:title=package-info.java}
@Vetoed(recursive=true)
package my.parent.package;
import javax.enterprise.inject.Vetoed;
{code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.1#6329)