On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > If you can point me to the paragraph in the spec and the corresponding TCK > test where it is clearly stated that an interceptor enablement is only meant > to work for the current bean archive bundle, then please provide it.
I don't know about the TCK, but clearly all the elements of the beans.xml are BDA-centric. | 2.6. Alternatives | An alternative is a bean that must be explicitly declared in the beans.xml file if it should be available for lookup, injection or EL resolution. | 9.4. Interceptor enablement and ordering | By default, a bean archive has no enabled interceptors bound via interceptor bindings. An interceptor must be explicitly enabled by listing its class under the <interceptors> element of the beans.xml file of the bean archive. You can't have interceptors enabled (and ordered) anywhere else, unless you manufacture a notion of a hierarchy of BDA's, in which case we need the very same change to reflect that relation. I'm not even considering the idea that the BDA of the interceptor class itself is where it ought to be enabled for all other beans, as this vicarious enablement would be totally off the charts. -- Eric Covener [email protected]
