[ https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CDI-746?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.s... ] Romain Manni-Bucau commented on CDI-746: ---------------------------------------- [~manovotn] I agree both cases "can" exist but since I never saw one of both I priviledge the other (once again, if you have some examples of this being wrong I could revise my position and try to find another solution).   Issue I have is more when the extension adds things cause it collected data to do so but then (after the collect) the bean is veto so the extension still do something (adds a new bean) whereas it shouldn't do anything and modify the bean set of the CDI context. Think to MP-Config, a way to impl it is to capture all ConfigProperty injections and add a bean for all these types. If in between a bean containing some of these injections is veto (and it was the only one with these types) then the extension will wrongly add these types/beans. Same with alternative regard (which can only be resolved after PBA) if not done early. In some cases the impact is only memory, in some other, the runtime is just wrong (if types are used for runtime, it is typically the case). -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.13.8#713008)