[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-245) Promote the right way how extensions should communicate with each other during container initialization

[Pete Muir (JIRA)]

    [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-245?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12713931#comment-12713931 ] 

Pete Muir commented on CDI-245:
-------------------------------

Right, to *inject* an extension into something else, it doesn't matter which view we take. 

BTW yes, I'm happy to remove BeanManager.getExtensions() in favor of injecting extensions into extensions.

It's when we consider what facilities of CDI that an extension can take, that this point matters. If we take the view you espouse, then we need to explicitly forbid everything that it can't do. If we take the view I outline, then we simply need to list the things it can do.
                
> Promote the right way how extensions should communicate with each other during container initialization
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CDI-245
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-245
>             Project: CDI Specification Issues
>          Issue Type: Clarification
>    Affects Versions: 1.0, 1.1.EDR
>            Reporter: Martin Kouba
>            Assignee: Pete Muir
>             Fix For: 1.1.PRD
>
>
> This is not clear right now. The spec allows (does not forbid) extensions to fire regular events via {{BeanManager}} and I believe this should be _the right way_. See also CDI-109 discussion. However we should also state that extensions _may not fire container lifecycle events_ as this could lead to unexpected results (and it's pretty broken imho).

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.jboss.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira