All work for me and the apps i work on since a few years. Le 3 avr. 2018 22:17, "Thomas Andraschko" <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> +1 for 3) > the workarounds are really not that big... > > i would leave it as it is for now and start with DS 2.0 (= CDI2.0 only) the > next months. > > 2018-04-03 22:06 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <gpetra...@apache.org>: > > > hi @ all, > > > > since we will need to maintain v1.8.x for a while and it's too early for > > using cdi 2.0 (for a while), we should discuss if we should have one > branch > > using cdi 1.2+. > > it would allow to get rid of several workarounds (and the corresponding > > warnings during the bootstrapping process). > > > > we had a short discussion in the irc-channel about the following options: > > #1) ds v1.x as it is right now; ds v2: jdk8 with cdi 1.2+ > > > > vs > > > > #2) ds v1.8.x: as it is right now; ds > v1.8.x && < v2.x: jdk8 with cdi > > v1.2+; ds v2: jdk8 with cdi 2.0+ > > > > vs > > > > #3) we don't care about v1.2 as a min. requirement at all > > (the workarounds are minimal anyway and users can continue to ignore the > > warnings during the bootstrapping process) > > > > or for sure > > #4) [any other nice suggestion] > > > > -> please send your preferred approach > > > > regards, > > gerhard > > >
