[cdi-dev] Time to start working on CDI lite

[Antonio Goncalves]

It's funny, I feel I'm in Rod Johnson shoes back in Java EE 6 where he
forked 330 because he found CDI was doing too much  ;o)

For me, "CDI Lite" was just basic dependency injection. The fact that CDI
can now run on SE (like JPA....), is good... but for me it has nothing to
do with Light : it's the entire thing that can bootstrap in SE. Good.

So what is Lite for you guys ?

Antonio

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2015-08-30 15:22 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <john.d.ament at gmail.com>:
>
>> Personally, I'm not in favor of a slimmed down runtime.  It was tried
>> with EJB, but never implemented properly (most implementations that support
>> EJB-lite actually support the entire thing, except for deprecated stuff).
>>
>>
> +1, most of CDI is basic and quickly any light version will miss events or
> other thing - in particular in maintaining micro services from experience.
> Size of an implementation can easily be < 1M so not sure it would bring
> anything. Only important point is what Antoine started to do ie ensuring EE
> and SE parts are clearly identified and split in the spec.
>
>
>> I think if we define SE properly we won't have a need for this.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 8:07 AM Antonio Goncalves <
>> antonio.goncalves at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> @Antoine, so which content do you see in CDI Lite ? Are you sure about
>>> events ?
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of a "fatter" 330 that would have :
>>>
>>>    - @Inject : already there
>>>    - @Qualifier : already there
>>>    -
>>> *Producers and disposers *
>>>    -
>>> *Programatic lookup *
>>>    - *Java SE Bootstrap*
>>>
>>> When you say "*The goal here is not to propose a new EE profile but a
>>> subspec*", 330 could already be seen as a subspec. If you put events
>>> apparts, what would be missing in this list in your point of view ? And
>>> what obstacles do you see in archieving this ?
>>>
>>> To boostrap CDI we have a CDIProvider, why not having an
>>> InjectionProvider just to bootstrap 330 (then, CDIProvider could extend
>>> InjectionProvider, so it bootstraps the all thing) ?
>>>
>>> Antonio
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
>>> antoine at sabot-durand.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes Arjan, I think it's the first reason. We really should work with
>>>> them to understand what should be added to CDI 2.0 to have it as a first
>>>> citizen DI in their spec.
>>>>
>>>> Le sam. 29 août 2015 à 23:15, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms at gmail.com> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Antonio Goncalves
>>>>> <antonio.goncalves at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > I remember talking with the JAX-RS guys (Java EE), years ago (back
>>>>> in EE6),
>>>>> > and their answer for not adopting CDI was "too heavy".
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't find an exact reference anymore, but I somewhat remember that
>>>>> one of the reasons was also simply that CDI as a general solution
>>>>> finished late in Java EE 6, while JAX-RS finished earlier and had all
>>>>> the work for their own DI solution already done.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20150830/be5fe977/attachment-0001.html