I personally did also wonder about this rather weird rule in the spec some years ago. Back then we concluded that it is rather an unintended behaviour. I'm surprised that it's now used intentionally. If you have an Extension in a jar and only want to use programmatic beans, then why the hack does one add e.g. an @ApplicationScoped annotation? This really sounds weird. So I'd rather simply use the existing jar-exclude in the scanning.
LieGrue, strub > Am 22.09.2021 um 11:19 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > Le mer. 22 sept. 2021 à 11:17, Thomas Andraschko < > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> I really prefer to make the spec the default behavior, nobody expects a JAR >> to be scanned without having a beans.xml but a extension >> normally if you would like to use CDI, but avoid scanning, you add a CDI >> extension but no beans.xml, thats exactly like MF and Mojarra is >> implemented >> > > Just to correct that, several people expect a jar with an extension to be > scanned in annotated mode without a beans.xml when it was full OWB from the > start. > This is why switching will silently break users. > So maybe a toggle with the same default than today + warning is saner. > > >> >> Lets wait for other opinions :) >> >> >> Am Mi., 22. Sept. 2021 um 11:08 Uhr schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau < >> rmannibu...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Think we should prefer our users over the spec for that so I'd be to >>> support it with a toggle to enable it >>> (org.apache.webbeans.skipJarWithExtensionScanning=false by default). >>> If needed we can add a bdascannerservice with it at true >> (WebSpecScanner). >>> And in 2.1 we can change it >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >>> < >>> >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >>>> >>> >>> >>> Le mer. 22 sept. 2021 à 11:06, Thomas Andraschko < >>> andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I discussed with Romain about OWB-1298. >>>> >>>> Mojarra has NO beans.xml but a CDI Extension, which currently breaks >> OWB >>>> as: >>>> - WebsocketUserManager is scanned >>>> - WebsocketUserManager is added in the extension >>>> >>>> in the specs (12.1) its defined, that: >>>> >>>> An archive which: >>>> >>>> - >>>> >>>> contains a beans.xml file with the bean-discovery-mode of none, or, >>>> - >>>> >>>> contains an extension and no beans.xml file >>>> >>>> is NOT a bean archive. >>>> >>>> >>>> Which means that OWB should NOT scan Mojarra and therefore users can >> use >>>> Mojarra with OWB, without adding it to the scan exclusions or setting >>> other >>>> properties. >>>> >>>> If MyFaces wouldnt be in the default exclusions, it would also break MF >>> and >>>> maybe other libs. >>>> >>>> We should fix it and make it the default behavior. >>>> >>>> It should even improve startup as we skip more archives per default. >>>> >>>> Romain mentioned that there could be cases, where it could break apps. >> So >>>> we should maybe introduce a new config property to enable the old >>> behavior >>>> again, which also scans archives with extensions but without beans.xml >>>> >>>> this is also related to org.apache.webbeans.scanBeansXmlOnly >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Thomas >>>> >>> >>
