OK Then lets please create a new property to enable spec behavior We could also add it to our default excludes
Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> schrieb am Do., 23. Sept. 2021, 22:07: > I think the current OWB behaviour is more correct from a user POV, even if > it's not 100% what the spec defines. > We can easily solve the Mojarra issue with a jar-exclude. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > Am 23.09.2021 um 21:47 schrieb Thomas Andraschko < > andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: > > > > So you also think we should make it a default behavior to NOT scan a JAR > > with extension and without beans.xml? > > > > Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> schrieb am Do., 23. Sept. > 2021, > > 21:26: > > > >> 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 > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
