+1

i would like to commit at least the current version of OWB-407 (if there are
no objections).

regards,
gerhard

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces



2010/8/10 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>

> Thanks Eric, but please make this available as alternate implementation
> only.
> Because I honestly think the BDA definition is utterly broken in the spec
> (*)!
> It makes assumptions about classloading mechanisms which are _most_ times
> true
> for _old_ EE containers but is a) NOT defined in the EE spec and b) is NOT
> true
> for modern EE containers anymore (which heavily use OSGi under the hood).
>
> I honestly believe that the mechanisms we have currently does suite
> professional
> needs much better than this overly strict BDA stuff does. And we _still_
> pass
> the TCK, so there is imo nothing to worry yet!
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> (*) marking a JAR (if available) as containing jars is really fine. And
> with
> Pete having added CDATA sections to the schema recently, we could now also
> add
> our own namespaced exclude and include rules to beans.xml for speeding up
> the
> classpath scanning. This is really neat.
> BUT there are a few heavily broken thinkgs in the BDA part of the spec. A
> few
> examples:
>
> .) having to write  <alternatives> into EACH BDA where it should be active
> is
> just idiotic
> .) same for <interceptors>
> .) same for <decorators>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Eric Covener <[email protected]>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Sent: Tue, August 10, 2010 3:56:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] releasing owb-1.0.0 next week?
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > Hi  folks!
> > >
> > > Gurkan and I had a small chat yesterday about the  stability of
> OpenWebBeans.
> >And
> > > we both agree that it really would  deserve a 1.0.0 number because it's
> >pretty
> > > stable. At least a lot more  stable than many commercial products with
> a 1.0
> > > release number  ;)
> >
> > +1, I hope to work on BDA awareness in the scanner service  /
> > {Bean,Alternatives,Interceptor}Manager stuff and I don't want to
> > derail  1.0 with it!
> >
> > Would we branch at 1.0, and would 1.0 still be  CTR?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Eric Covener
> > [email protected]
> >
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to