[cdi-dev] explicit bean archives discovery-mode 'annotated'

[Antoine Sabot-Durand]

> Le 6 mars 2015 à 09:03, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> Hi
> 
> Well you cant ask libs to change their programming model for it IMO. It is clearly a regression.
> 
Far easier than informing all lib users to change or create bean discovery mode.
> Another broken case is if any other IoC uses some of these annotations but doesnt rely on scanning. Now you scan the jar and can get surprises and even an Error.
> 

Not true anymore. all bean defining annotation are only CDI annotation now : http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#bean_defining_annotations <http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#bean_defining_annotations>.

That was one of the fix in CDI 1.2 MR.

> Le 6 mars 2015 08:12, "Jozef Hartinger" <jharting at redhat.com <mailto:jharting at redhat.com>> a écrit :
> This interface/enum discovery use-case very often uses a marker
> annotation (e.g. @MessageBundle). Such extension can work around this
> limitation by making the marker annotation a @Stereotype. Can you see
> any other scenarios where implicit bean archives are a problem?
> 
> On 03/05/2015 09:28 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> > Well, the terms ‚explicit‘ and ‚implicit‘ BDA are blurry as well. I_explicitly_  add a beans.xml with version=1.1 and bean-discovery-mode=„annotated“ and still it is an ‚implicit‘ BDA according to those definitions. Not very self-explaining but anyway. Has not much to do with the current topic as well, so not sure why you mentioned it?
> >
> > An example of usability would e.g. be the DeltaSpike @MessageBundle feature. Seam3 has had something similar afair.
> > For those who don’t know it see [1]. You basically have an interface and DeltaSpike automatically picks those up and provides implementations for them which are registered as Beans.
> >
> > But in the ‚annotated‘ mode we wont get any PAT for those interfaces anymore. The same mechanism is used tor JPA archives, PropertyFileConfig, etc…
> > Just grep DeltaSpike and check where PAT gets used. It’s all over the place…
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev <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 <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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150306/1d86b18c/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150306/1d86b18c/attachment.bin