[cdi-dev] It seems we missed a point in CDIProvider enhancement

Thu May 14 09:48:47 EDT 2015

Yes Mark I know, but it others voiced for it... Now let's the users give
their opinion.
Le jeu. 14 mai 2015 à 15:22, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> a écrit :

> I DID voice against multiple CDI impls both on the mailing list and on EG
> meetings…
>
> > Am 14.05.2015 um 10:44 schrieb Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net>:
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > My question wasn’t about the feature which have been discussed for more
> than 2 months. This feature is now going to EDR1 since there wasn’t voice
> against it. And again EDR1 is not final spec. You’ll be able to discuss it
> with the community when it’ll be proposed.
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> >
> >
> >> Le 14 mai 2015 à 10:36, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >>
> >> That usecase is imo not really valid. Such a testing framework would
> need a ClassLoader isolation to work. Just create a child UrlClassLoader
> with your test project in and be done. Otherwise you would get into a total
> mess with static fields etc. It simply makes no sense in my opinion and
> propagates bad practice.
> >>
> >>
> >>> think the fact that there’s no specific use case doesn’t mean we
> should forbid this.
> >> If it requires the impls to do all kind of mad stuff then we at least
> should not require it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>> Am 14.05.2015 um 09:23 schrieb Martin Kouba <mkouba at redhat.com>:
> >>>
> >>> Just quoting Jozef from the referenced Weld 3.0.0.Alpha8 announcement:
> >>>
> >>> "One possible use-case this enables is for a library or framework
> (e.g. a testing framework) to use an embedded instance of Weld internally
> for its own needs (dependency injection, events, extensibility). This
> instance would not interfere with the Weld instance used by the
> application."
> >>>
> >>> I think the fact that there's no specific use case doesn't mean we
> should forbid this.
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>> Dne 14.5.2015 v 09:12 Mark Struberg napsal(a):
> >>>> I still don’t get it what running multiple CDI container on the SAME
> ClassLoader/Thread should be for?
> >>>> What’s the use case?
> >>>>
> >>>> LieGrue,
> >>>> strub
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 14.05.2015 um 08:11 schrieb Martin Kouba <mkouba at redhat.com>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Antoine,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Weld SE 3.0.0.Alpha8 [1] (which allows to start multiple independent
> >>>>> Weld instances) has a special CDIProvider implementation [2]:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * if there's exactly one container running, return this container
> >>>>> * if there are multiple containers running, log an INFO message and
> >>>>> attempt to identify the container by the calling class:
> >>>>> ** if there is only one container aware of the class, return this
> container
> >>>>> ** otherwise return the first container initialized
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Martin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1]
> >>>>> http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2015/04/21/weld-300Alpha8/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [2]
> >>>>>
> https://github.com/weld/core/blob/master/environments/se/core/src/main/java/org/jboss/weld/environment/se/WeldSEProvider.java
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dne 13.5.2015 v 19:08 Antoine Sabot-Durand napsal(a):
> >>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While cleaning Javadoc in CDIProvider, I realized that getCDI()
> method description is not compatible with the multiple container
> initialization we allowed in the API.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While running in Java EE getCDI() retuns the current container
> which is fine since there’s only one, but what do we expect from it when
> running in SE?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I thought of 2 simple solutions for EDR1:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1) make getCDI() return the last CDI object initialized by the
> CDIProvider
> >>>>>> 2) Forbid getCDI() in SE
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Of course there’s always the solution of moving the code outside
> CDIProvider, but it’s less simple…
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wdyt,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Antoine
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Martin Kouba
> >>>>> Software Engineer
> >>>>> Red Hat, Czech Republic
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> 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.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Martin Kouba
> >>> Software Engineer
> >>> Red Hat, Czech Republic
> >>
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20150514/46f241b6/attachment.html 