If 299 looks superficially like Guice, it's because I was heavily involved. I left the EG over a year ago because I disagreed with the leadership and technical direction.
So far, I haven't bothered to actively oppose 299 for a few reasons: 1) 299 doesn't seem to have gained any real traction. Only RedHat is pushing it. You've heard of design by committee? 299 is design by Gavin. :-) 2) 299 is part of EE, which we don't use or care much about. I think the risk of 299 imposing itself on SE is zero. 3) I choose to spend my time constructively (on the Java language, Guice, JSR 166, Android, etc.), not playing political games. My advice to our users is to continue using the Guice API. Your code will be more maintainable as a result. JSR 299 does not represent consensus. It's a land grab by unqualified vendors who would rather prematurely set an unproven design in stone than compete on a level playing field. It's EJB and JSF all over again. By comparison, the Guice API has enjoyed many times the scrutiny by people who actually use and understand this stuff. Guice is simpler, better specified and more future proof as a result. In other words, Guice will not directly support 299, but you could easily build a 299 extension for Guice. You'd be better off sticking to the Guice API though. Bob --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
