That's fine for me. But at some point we will need to separate. I think the main issue will be the different TCKs we need to pass.
LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Mark > Struberg <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 12:21 AM > Subject: Re: Go ahead with CDI 1.1 > > 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 >>> >
