If it possible to have both behavior? Adding a class for it while you can have in some kind of project a module qualifier is too much IMO. Supporting both in the em lookup impl should be easy.
PS: whatever the answer to previous question is, is it possible to get a 0.5.1 soon with the fix? *Romain Manni-Bucau* *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* 2013/10/2 Thomas Hug <[email protected]> > Hi Romain, > if I remember correctly the idea with a resolver was to make things > consistent over DS (similar constructs in the JSF module). > ...and yes, there's a return missing (d'oh!). Will create a ticket / fix. > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > in org.apache.deltaspike.data.impl.handler.EntityManagerLookup#lookupFor > we > > use the em resolver then we return the entityManager.get() instead of the > > result. Is it intended? > > > > Why not using a qualifier to resolve the em? It was easier IMO > > > > *Romain Manni-Bucau* > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > >
