the big failure of the JSR 299 is that it just lives in JavaEE land. Best would have been to introduce a flexible DI API in SE land. This could be extended in all the different profiles. So, 299 could have just been a *consumer* of that flexible DI in order to extend it and add the things that are needed for EJB and all the other EE things.
just my $0.02 -M On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Simon Lessard <[email protected]> wrote: > Weird, it certainly overlaps BIG time, most of what their spec seem to have > is already in JSR-299 too... Maybe I'm missing something... > > On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> FYI >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Matthias Wessendorf <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:34 PM >> Subject: FYI: javax.inject* standard ... >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: Pete Muir <[email protected]> >> >> >> FYI: >> http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2009/05/javaxinjectinject.html >> >> what does this mean to JSR 299 ? >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
