[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-317) review PassivationCapable interface

[Mark Struberg (JIRA)]

    [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-317?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12746492#comment-12746492 ] 

Mark Struberg commented on CDI-317:
-----------------------------------

That would effectively duplicate the number of needed Bean<?> in a container. And the effect is really the same!
                
> review PassivationCapable interface
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CDI-317
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-317
>             Project: CDI Specification Issues
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Beans
>            Reporter: Mark Struberg
>             Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed)
>
>
> Currently the spec says that only _passivation capable Beans_ must implement the PassivationCapable interface.
> But a Bean class could result in both passivation-capable and not-passivation-capable beans. For e.g. a ProducerMethodBean it depends on the scope of the produced instance. For implementing this properly you would need to always need 2 classes for each bean-type. And even worse - often you know only after the all the Bean-building that this very bean is passivation-capable or not.
> Thus I suggest to extend the meaning of PassivationCapable#getId() to allow returning *null* if the very bean doesn't support passivation.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira