<div dir="ltr">@Antoine, so which content do you see in CDI Lite ? Are you sure about events ? <div><br></div><div>I'm in favor of a "fatter" 330 that would have :<div><ul><li>@Inject : already there<br></li><li>@Qualifier : already there<br></li><li><b>Producers and disposers<br></b></li><li><b>Programatic lookup<br></b></li><li><b>Java SE Bootstrap</b><br></li></ul><div>When you say "<span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px;white-space:pre-wrap"><i>The goal here is not to propose a new EE profile but a subspec</i></span>", 330 could already be seen as a subspec. If you put events apparts, what would be missing in this list in your point of view ? And what obstacles do you see in archieving this ?</div></div></div><div><br></div><div>To boostrap CDI we have a CDIProvider, why not having an InjectionProvider just to bootstrap 330 (then, CDIProvider could extend InjectionProvider, so it bootstraps the all thing) ?</div><div><br></div><div>Antonio</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:antoine@sabot-durand.net" target="_blank">antoine@sabot-durand.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="white-space:pre-wrap">Yes Arjan, I think it's the first reason. We really should work with them to understand what should be added to CDI 2.0 to have it as a first citizen DI in their spec.<br></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">Le sam. 29 août 2015 à 23:15, arjan tijms <<a href="mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com" target="_blank">arjan.tijms@gmail.com</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Antonio Goncalves<br>
<<a href="mailto:antonio.goncalves@gmail.com" target="_blank">antonio.goncalves@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> I remember talking with the JAX-RS guys (Java EE), years ago (back in EE6),<br>
> and their answer for not adopting CDI was "too heavy".<br>
<br>
I can't find an exact reference anymore, but I somewhat remember that<br>
one of the reasons was also simply that CDI as a general solution<br>
finished late in Java EE 6, while JAX-RS finished earlier and had all<br>
the work for their own DI solution already done.<br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Antonio Goncalves <br>Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author<br><br><a href="http://www.antoniogoncalves.org" target="_blank">Web site</a> | <a href="http://twitter.com/agoncal" target="_blank">Twitter</a> | <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal" target="_blank">LinkedIn</a> | <a href="http://pluralsight.com/training/Authors/Details/antonio-goncalves" target="_blank">Pluralsight</a> | <a href="http://www.parisjug.org" target="_blank">Paris JUG</a> | <a href="http://www.devoxx.fr" target="_blank">Devoxx France</a></div></div>
</div>