On Aug 19, 2010, at 8:31 AM, David Blevins wrote: > > On Aug 19, 2010, at 4:50 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote: > >> >> Hello guys, >> >> Just want to get your opinion about our jcdi branch. >> >> Is it still relevant to keep this branch? >> The trunk is now fully Java EE 6 oriented. >> I read some discussion (between David, Jacek, ...) about the next generation >> of OpenEJB (Shall we base our code on CDI spec? Do we want to make it >> OSGiable?....). >> >> Actually, each time we commit something in the trunk we try to merge those >> changes in branches/openejb-3.1.x. Obviously, that's not the case for the >> jcdi branch. >> >> So, is it just a kind of POC? > > We need CDI support as part of EJB 3.1/Java EE 6. The branch is basically > there to work out all the details on how the two integrate without > destabilizing all the EJB 3.1 TCK work that is going on. > > Initially we had a ton of test failures and errors, but things are looking a > bit better. I've tried to keep all the changes isolated so it shouldn't be > too hard to move them over -- which will hopefully be soon.
Ok, going to give merging a go. Really really hope I can avoid excessive breakage. Likely will be tricky for a while with SNAPSHOT dependencies on an ever changing OWB. -David
