Whats the qualifier issue you're referring to? On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 8:05 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Same here, I just doubt we have an owb impl supporting the qualifier model > change today so we can stay on OWB 2.0.5 or need to backport it to 1.x as > well (which can likely be the case as well but can need to be done in > parallel). > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > 2018-04-23 13:17 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament <[email protected]>: > >> If you already have a PR submitted even better. We should accept it. >> >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 7:07 AM Rudy De Busscher <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Not that hard, except maybe for the NonBinding thing which is removed >>> from @Claim. >>> >>> All the rest was done in 20 minutes or so. >>> >>> On 23 April 2018 at 13:03, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Overall same view here. >>>> How hard is it to make it 1.2 compliant? >>>> >>>> >>>> Le lun. 23 avr. 2018 à 12:25, John D. Ament <[email protected]> a >>>> écrit : >>>> >>>>> MP has made it very clear they don't care about portable libraries, >>>>> and only care about the vendor provided solutions. The requirement is >>>>> that >>>>> vendors provide a CDI 1.2 runtime to use. Liberty provides a way to >>>>> switch >>>>> between them (1.2, 2.0). I think Swarm may have moved to 2.0; not sure. >>>>> >>>>> I think Safeguard also compiles against CDI 2.0, but I don't think I'm >>>>> using any 2.0 features in it so it may run properly against 1.2. >>>>> >>>>> Personally, if we have a user who wants it for 1.2, and the effort is >>>>> minimal we should appease that user to help build out the community. >>>>> >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 2:17 AM Romain Manni-Bucau < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> current codebase uses cdi 2.0 which means it can be used on tomee, >>>>>> meecrowave, openwebbeans etc... >>>>>> >>>>>> Rudy opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6604 to >>>>>> move it to cdi 1.2 - BTW "Microprofile depends on CDI 1.2, so using >>>>>> 2.0 is wrong." is wrong since some years you can always use a version >>>>>> *>=* >>>>>> of the minimum requirement for spec impls. >>>>>> Technically I don't see a strong need to do it but I'd like to get >>>>>> your feeling about it to know what we do of the issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >>>>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >>>>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >>>>>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >>>>>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
