<p dir="ltr"><br>
Le 18 juin 2015 20:37, "Mark Struberg" <<a href="mailto:struberg@yahoo.de">struberg@yahoo.de</a>> a écrit :<br>
><br>
> 1.) The whole point is that @RequestScoped is NOT a web context!<br>
><br>
> Otherwise it would _not_ be active in JMS etc…<br>
> And that was not an accident but intentional.<br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">Excepted it is highly bound to web (events, lifecycle etc...). Ejb integ is weak and could have been ignored - just my opinion on this last part, dont want a thread on this.<br></p>
<p dir="ltr">> 2.) And no, different async threads will _never_ get the same request context…<br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">Start to use it and you ll miss it - or u missed my point.</p>
<p dir="ltr">><br>
> 3.) no @RequestScoped is a sub-part of a @ThreadScoped. Otherwise you would get the same context for 2 JMS invocations which get (randomly) executed on the same worker thread. Got me?<br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">ThreadScoped =TaskScope for an executor service.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The whole point is while you cant use it urself - without DS - it is not a threadscope. Is it clearer?</p>
<p dir="ltr">><br>
> LieGrue,<br>
> strub<br>
><br>
><br>
> > Am 18.06.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <<a href="mailto:rmannibucau@gmail.com">rmannibucau@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
> ><br>
> > Hi<br>
> ><br>
> > I wouldn't activate any "web" scope by default, in particular for async events where I think most of the time it will not be used. Next feature request will be to inherit the scope between async threads....and here I guess we agree it will not go very far.<br>
> ><br>
> > Side note: using request scope where actually a thread scope is needed is a pain, maybe time to add a thread scoped with an accessible manual activation. Would make "batches", "timers" etc easy to impl/integrate.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Romain Manni-Bucau<br>
> > @rmannibucau | Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber<br>
> ><br>
> > 2015-06-18 15:10 GMT+02:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <<a href="mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net">antoine@sabot-durand.net</a>>:<br>
> > Hi guys,<br>
> ><br>
> > We should finally decide how to manage normal scope context (other than application context ) in SE and during Async Event for EDR1.<br>
> ><br>
> > Having only RequestContext active during async event as Martin suggest in the PR makes sense and would be consistent with its behavior during async EJB call.<br>
> ><br>
> > Mark asked twice to activate Request Context all the time in SE (making it a new Application Context). I’m not found of it, but I’ml not the only one to decide here.<br>
> ><br>
> > What is you feeling about this ?<br>
> ><br>
> > Antoine<br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > cdi-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
> ><br>
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > cdi-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org">cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev">https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev</a><br>
> ><br>
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (<a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html">http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html</a>). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.<br>
><br>
</p>