[cdi-dev] cdi-dev Digest, Vol 57, Issue 33

Sun Aug 30 10:36:19 EDT 2015

2015-08-30 16:29 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil at gmail.com>:

> Looking at the requirements for SE Embedded (on the lower side of SE)
> probably helps:
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/embedded/embedded-se/documentation/javase-embedded-sysreq-2043454.html
>
> The 3 MB binary app size Romain mentioned is a good example. Could be a
> bit steep for Embedded, but as an upper end it sounds reasonable.
>
>
Just to explain this 3M:
- CDI / IoC ~ 1M
- You always need at least another framework, considered 1M for it min
taking JAXRS as sample (with a json provider) but for a batch it would be
less ~ 500K min
- plus a JDBC driver, MySQL is 1M as well, hsqldb is 1.4M

So 3M seems a light app if only based on CDI. For a EE app it is a lot
(JPA, CDI, JAXRS are provided).

> Btw. although Rod Johnson and Bob Lee were listed as co Spec Leads, pretty
> much every initial contribution and effort came from Google/Bob:
> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=330
>
> The EG had a couple of others like Tapestry, but I am not sure, when it
> e.g. adopted JSR 330 instead of its own DI library if it ever fully
> supported it to date?
>
> Werner
>
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:11 PM, <cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org> wrote:
>
>> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
>>         cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Time to start working on CDI lite (Romain Manni-Bucau)
>>    2. Re: Time to start working on CDI lite (Werner Keil)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 16:02:32 +0200
>> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Time to start working on CDI lite
>> To: Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves at gmail.com>
>> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CACLE=
>> 7Mu5mMB3tFWLtPxNXRpKrR82xKku5saFB9it3n-8RU1aQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Lite can have several definition, let's try to list them up if it can
>> help:
>>
>> - binary size: for me until 3M for an app it is "Lite"
>> - features number: the whole IoC set of feature is light since you almost
>> always need it, it means you can do lighter but it wouldnt be used - check
>> spring, who uses only spring-ioc and not context or more?
>> - features complexity: sure we are not light here but supporting scopes
>> already breaks "Lite-ness" IMO so not a real issue
>>
>> So my view is CDI "SE" is light enough - as a spec and spec can't affect
>> implementations so seems the fight is not on the right side to me.
>>
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
>> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
>>
>> 2015-08-30 15:57 GMT+02:00 Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves at gmail.com
>> >:
>>
>> > 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 ao?t 2015 ? 23:15, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms at gmail.com> a
>> >>>>> ?crit :
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> 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/db8e0477/attachment-0001.html
>>
>>
>> End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 57, Issue 33
>> ***************************************
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150830/720a6627/attachment.html 