> 330 is a little JSR, so I guess the effort wouldn't be large. > 299 I haven't read yet, but I guess it's way larger.
330 is not much more than standardized DI annotations. It is a good starting point, but I am not sure if we gain a lot from it. 299 is more interesting.. it defines a SPI for developing portable extensions to JavaEE. If I am right, this could be the integration point with tapestry-ioc. If you are interested in more detail, there is good documentation available here: http://seamframework.org/Weld >> Not sure, but I think Spring would then be >> available for free as well... > > Spring already is available. Yes - but in case JSR-299 gives us spring for free, maybe we don't need to maintain two seperate modules. > Yes. And we should had a DI standard for Java, not just for Java EE. That's > what I think was a serious error of 299 that was only corrected (if it was > corrected) after 330 was started. As far as I know, JSR-299 as well as 330 can be used outside of any container. After all, JavaEE is just a bunch of JSRs bundled together.. but if you prefer you may put together everything on top of JavaSE as well. Piero --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
