[cdi-dev] bean archive != bean archive

Jozef Hartinger jharting at redhat.com
Mon Feb 3 08:19:57 EST 2014

Yes, this seems wrong. For EJB modules and libraries this is fine but 
there seems to be a conflict between 5.1 and 12.1 for WAR modules. Also, 
implicit bean archives do not seem to be reflected within 5.1.

On 02/02/2014 10:01 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Hi folks!
> Old story again:
> The spec is not really clear imo what the term 'bean archive' (aka 
> BDA) does mean.
> The section 5.1 (Modularity) indicates that a bunch of jars might get 
> interpreted as a 'bean archive', which in hindsight of isolation makes 
> sense. E.g. it does not make sense that beans from different jars in 
> an EARs shared lib folder cannot 'see' each other in respect to CDI.
> This is the one which also applies to cdi-1.0 @Alternatives and 
> @Interceptor rules, right?
> Otoh there is also section 12 which uses the same term 'bean archive' 
> for single JARs (or ClassPath entries like WEB-INF/classes).
> So which one should be it? Imo the 2 are fundamentally different.
> Any ideas or comments? Did I get this wrong?
> LieGrue,
> strub
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20140203/f6fe855b/attachment.html 

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list