Re: [seam-dev] Don't we need a Seam - Spring module ?

Your smiley suggest that this has been already discussed / decided. I missed those discussion apparently. Sorry... Antoine 2011/6/29 Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; Yes, we should do this :-) Marius is the owner. On 29 Jun 2011, at 14:28, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote: > Hi Team, > > 3 weeks ago I started a consulting mission in a big Insurance company that is Redhat / JBoss customer. They use most of Java EE 5 implementation provided by JBoss 5 EAP except for EJB 3. No EJB because it's also a Spring Shop. One of my missions is to help them to build their next official stack based on JBoss EAP 6 (which should be out in January). So I try to promote full Java EE 6 stack (with CDI and EJB 3.1) and put Spring aside as an alternative/Legacy framework. But it won't work if they don't have a supported solution to use their old Spring components / Knowledge in this new stack. > More globally one big objection I encounter very often with the adoption of CDI (at least in France) is investment done in Spring. So if we want to facilitate the adoption we have to provide a Bridge with Spring to allow devs to integrate the "de facto standard" in the "official standard". > I know that Rick Hightower and CDISource Team wrote a nice extension on the subject (https://github.com/CDISource/cdisource) but I think such a module should be endorsed by a company that'll provide support on it like RH. > Seam 2 provided this Bridge so it seems normal to provide it as well in Seam 3. > What is your opinion ? > > Thanks, > > -- > Antoine Sabot-Durand > > _______________________________________________ > seam-dev mailing list > seam-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev -- Antoine Sabot-Durand Manager technique ------------------------------- Ippon Technologies 3, rue Bellanger 92300 Levallois Perret t. 01.46.12.48.48 f. 01.46.12.48.49 p. 06.08.55.34.26 e. asd(a)ippon.fr www.ippon.fr