No problem with that, But I think we don't need to switch to another branch (owb-2.0) to implement cdi 1.1 features. The current code base needs just one line of code to change (and some additional implemented methods) to implement the cdi 1.1 API So imho we can start implementing cdi 1.1 features on the owb-1.2 stream while still staying at the cdi 1.0 API.
Does anyone has objections against implementing cdi 1.1 features in the own-1.2 stream (actually this was already done at some points) WITHOUT referencing the 1.1 API, i.e. implement https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-58 ? Cheers, Arne Am 11.04.13 20:23 schrieb "Mark Struberg" unter <[email protected]>: >I'd say we keep 1.2 as CDI-1.0 and implement CDI-1.1 in 2.0. > >Reason is that this will allow TomEE-1.6.x to switch to owb-1.2.x and >take a bit more time to implement cdi-1.1 without having to stay on >owb-1.1.x >This will be much easier to maintain and develop cdi-1.1 that way imo. > >LieGrue, >strub > > > > >----- Original Message ----- >> From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 7:12 PM >> Subject: Go ahead with CDI 1.1 >> >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to go ahead and implement CDI 1.1 on the OWB 1.2 stream. >> I wonder, if some of the java ee container implementors want to use the >>1.2 >> stream in a pre java ee 7 release. >> If so, I would like to find a way to do this. Maybe this would be >>possible with >> a maven profile and some maven hacking (has someone used the >> maven-replacer-plugin?). >> If no one is interested in a CDI 1.0 OWB 1.2 stream, we directly can go >>ahead >> and implement CDI 1.1 >> >> WDYT? >> >> Cheers, >> Arne >>
