[cdi-dev] Managing Dependent Scoped Beans

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Le 16 mai 2016 10:01, "Martin Kouba" <mkouba at redhat.com> a écrit :
>
> Dne 15.5.2016 v 16:14 John D. Ament napsal(a):
> > Hey guys
> >
> > Seems like we have some issues in JIRA all focused on managing the
> > lifecycle of Dependent scoped beans.  It also seems like we have many
> > differing opinions about how to manage them.
> >
> > - Martin raised a PR to add a release() method to Instance to help
> > destroy a dependent bean https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/286
> > - I raised a PR https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/289 to update the
> > spec to clarify how to manage a dependent scoped bean.
> >
> > Right now, it seems that the big disagreement is whether
> > Instance.destroy() can destroy objects not created by it (the case being
> > around the CDI utility class, being an impl of Instance).  I'm currently
> > heavily against Martin's proposed changes, but want to get input from
> > others on the group to understand their perspective.
> >
> > - Does the spec require destroy() to be called only on instances that it
> > created?  When I read 5.6.1 the only requirement I see is that it has to
> > be a dependent scoped bean.  Note when I ask this I'm asking from the
> > spec perspective, its a different problem if there's some issues with
> > implementations following suite (I would imagine there needs to be some
> > shared global registry of dependent scoped beans for this to work).
> >
> > - Do we want two methods that effectively do the same thing?  I don't
> > see a strong difference between the two.
>
> Instance.destroy() currently always destroys the contextual instance.
> Which is not always what users expect. That's why I proposed to add
> Instance.release() - https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/286,
> previously Instance.getBean() - https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/273.
>

Since you give the instance to both I guess the intention from user point
of view is obvious and then we dont need 2 methods. What would be the other
use case?

> >
> > On the flipside, my change is more a spec clarification.  I'm thinking
> > more now that it belongs as a reword of 5.6.1 to clarify how to use
> > destroy() on dependent beans, rather than where I put it.  I think
> > realistically we have all of the tools needed to manage the lifecycle of
> > these classes, just need to clarify them for people to use.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160516/d339c8b9/attachment.html