[cdi-dev] On @Observes for async events

Arne Limburg arne.limburg at openknowledge.de
Wed Mar 18 04:05:30 EDT 2015

Hi to all,

I think the biggest issue with backward compatibility is, that the current
@Observes annotation by default has TransactionPhase.IN_PROGRESS.
I think we can¹t deal with this, if the default for observers would be
async. So I think there is no way to specify async as default without
loosing backward compatibility.
Any other thoughts?


Am 18.03.15 08:48 schrieb "Antoine Sabot-Durand" unter
<antoine at sabot-durand.net>:

>Hi all,
>Yesterday we had another meeting to try to find a better solution than
>explicitly activating async event on observer, without no success. I
>understand that we should go on on this feature so what I suggest is to
>have a meeting (an hangout) with people that want to try to find a better
>solution. If we find something we¹ll do a last proposal, and in all case
>we¹ll adopt the woking solution next week for this point. People
>interested with this please manifest yourself.
>If we have to go with opt-in (have to explicitly declare an observer
>supporting async event) we also have to validate the decision to use a
>member in @Observes (as it was decided before) or go back on that as
>mMark keep asking by introducing a new annotation to add on the observer
>(@Async or something similar). As I said when we discussed this point, I
>prefer the member in @Observes but we may have overlooked issues linked
>to backward compatibility.
>A third solution might be to introduce an @ObserveAsync to declare an
>asynchronous capable observerŠ
>I¹m waiting for active feedback from you to find the best solution taking
>ALL aspects (not only the technicals one) into account.

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list