[cdi-dev] DefinitionException vs DeploymentException

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

+1 saw the same as well working on cdi TCKs + with Instance and Provider
not sure splitting it means anything


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>

2015-03-03 14:54 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>:

> Hi!
>
> I think we currently fail to have a clean notion about what should be a
> DefinitionException and what should be a DeploymentException.
>
> It seems like most of the TCK in this regard is just modelling Weld
> behaviour and follows no whatever logic.
>
> E.,g. we have 2 tests doing almost the same:
>
> org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.extensions.lifecycle.bbd.broken.passivatingScope.AddingPassivatingScopeTest
> Which according to the TCK should throw a DefinitionException
>
> and
>
>
> org.jboss.cdi.tck.tests.context.passivating.broken.NonPassivationManagedBeanHasPassivatingScopeTest
> which according to the TCK should throw a DeploymentException
>
> But BOTH actually do the same: they test if some managed bean implements
> Serializable. And both do this during bootstrap.
>
>
> Am I blind and don’t see the difference, or is all this just madly broken?
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150303/f75d9f7d/attachment.html