go for it marius. I'd say we try to get 0.3-incubating out of the door next week? And then we can freely add all that stuff.
LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Marius Bogoevici <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 6, 2012 9:41 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deltaspike-spring in v0.4 ? > > On 12-07-06 3:27 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> IMO cdi-query is more important than any integration with a third party >> (spring, osgi..) >> >> Wdyt? > I think that one shouldn't exclude the other, as committers and > contributors can focus on different areas of interest. >> Le 6 juil. 2012 21:21, "Marius Bogoevici" > <[email protected]> a >> écrit : >> >>> All, >>> >>> I know that it is a final the final stretch for 0.3 so all the energy > is >>> flowing in that direction, however, as a 0.4 release is brewing, I > think it >>> is a good moment to discuss whether a Spring bridge should be included > in >>> the 0.4 release. I believe that such a module should be included now, > based >>> on the fact that Java EE 6 is gaining momentum, and a number of > developers >>> I recently encountered have asked about ways to reuse their existing > Spring >>> codebase with the newly available features in Java EE 6. It is possible > to >>> direct people to Seam Spring and such, however it is clear from the > start >>> that those libraries will need to be replaced soon. >>> >>> So, I'd like to start a more in-depth discussion about features and >>> design. An early glimpse is on the wiki page > https://cwiki.apache.org/** >>> > DeltaSpike/spring-cdi-**integration.html<https://cwiki.apache.org/DeltaSpike/spring-cdi-integration.html>, >>> but that is mostly providing a frame of refernence. >>> >>> I plan to start the discussion over the weekend, or as early as > possible >>> next week, but IMO for it to make sense the first step is clarifying > that >>> such a module could potentially be included on the 0.4 roadmap (knowing >>> that the roadmap for 0.4 is yet to be defined). As I said, from my > point of >>> view this is a critically important item, and can be addressed now, > given >>> how the general-purpose facilities of DeltaSpike are in place. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Marius >>> >
