[cdi-dev] New Servlet related scope - @UpgradeScoped (?)

[Antonio Goncalves]

Hi

FYI we are hoping to have no Servlet related topics in the CDI 2.0
specification. The idea is for other specifications to use CDI to create
their own scope (@ViewScoped/@FlowScoped in JSF, but also
@TransactionScoped in JTA). Following this logic, the @UpgradeScoped would
make sense in the WebSocket spec.

Antonio

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek at oracle.com> wrote:

>  Hello Arjan,
>
> On 03/12/14 19:44, arjan tijms wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday, December 3, 2014, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how to solve issue in JSR 356 - Java API for
>> WebSocket, related to CDI scope usable from WebSocket endpoints. Problem
>> is, that "standard" scopes do not apply, because there is no
>> @RequestScoped (http response is already sent), HttpSession does not
>> need to be created and the rest does not seem to be applicable, ...
>>
>> I believe that CDI specification should define @UpgradeScoped, which
>> would cover usages of HttpUpgradeHandler from Servlet API. (Similarly as
>> it does for @RequestScoped, @SessionScoped, ... )
>
>
>  Wouldn't it be a better option to have WebSocket define that scope, using
> CDI to implement it?
>
>
> That is one possibility, but @UpgradeScoped would be more general than
> just for WebSocket - it would apply for all HTTP/1.1+ Upgrade applications.
> In my eyes, it is something which was forgotten to do in Java EE 7 release,
> since HttpUpgradeHandler was introduced in it.
>
> Also please note, that other Servlet related scopes are already in CDI
> spec, so it seems like it belongs there more than anywhere else. This might
> have multiple reasons - for example, you can easily define relationship
> between @UpgradeScoped and others, already existing ones. In this sense,
> CDI specification now depends on Servlet API (it references some of the
> classes defined in it), but Servlet does not do that for CDI. I don't think
> that Servlet spec should introduce similar dependency just because of new
> scope.
>
> Thanks,
> Pavel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>



-- 
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author

Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter
<http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> |
Pluralsight
<http://pluralsight.com/training/Authors/Details/antonio-goncalves> | Paris
JUG <http://www.parisjug.org> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141204/1facbab2/attachment-0001.html