[cdi-dev] bean archives

[Emily Jiang]

Has anyone created a cdi spec jira for this or I should create one?

On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2015-05-05 13:39 GMT+02:00 Jozef Hartinger <jharting at redhat.com>:
>
>> On 05/05/2015 11:38 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> > Or section 12.
>> >
>> > Both ways are perfectly backward incompatible. If you drop BDA in
>> section 5 then you break EE modularity and compatibility to EE6 servers
>> (incuding RI). If you drop BDA in section 12 then you break scanning.
>> They are not incompatible. The only problem with Chapter 5 is that the
>> way it is written gives some room for a wrong interpretation that is
>> seemingly inconsistent with Chapter 12. The only open issue here
>> therefore is how to rephrase the chapter to make it easier to read
>> correctly the first time.
>> >
>> > We really need to handle this carefully.
>> >
>> > Imo we should finally accept that there are 2 different ‚BDA‘ use cases
>> and they both need a different Term. What about using the term BDA for
>> section 12 and only for scanning.
>> There is a behavior defined in the spec, implemented in the EE7 RI (and
>> all other compliant implementations) and tested in the TCK. We are not
>> going to redefine the behavior. What we should do is to update the spec
>> wording to be more easily understood.
>> >   And the term ‚EE module‘ for section 5 (visibility) + interceptors,
>> alternatives and decorators. That is basically how the EE6 RI behaved and
>> what is the best for users.
>> Wrong. The EE6 RI implements bean archive isolation correctly (I just
>> checked).
>>
>
> Didn't check glassfish but most of EE 6 servers didn't respect it cause it
> was just impossible to write an application using a CDI library with such a
> rule. I think it should be taken into account anyway because it is an
> important feedback to the spec.
>
>
>> >   It also allows for_much_  better performance! And also please
>> acknowledge the Alternatives-per-JAR is a major PITA in_real_  projects.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>



-- 
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang at apache.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150511/bd249692/attachment-0001.html