This is an exchange between Christian and Guillaume from couple of months
back when I was asking about this. I've put Guillaume's comments in bold.
DI would be great but it is is less well supported on OSGi than blueprint
and the current implementations also have the same bad proxy behaviour. So
while I would like to see a really good CDI implementation on OSGi with
dynamic behaviour like DS we are not there yet.
*No, the work I've done on CDI is free from those drawbacks. It has the
same semantics as DS, so anything you can do in DS, you can do in CDI. You
can even do more than DS because you can wire services "internally", i.e.
you don't have to expose your services to the OSGi registry to wire them
On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 8:34:57 PM UTC-5, Matt Sicker wrote:
> I'm not so sure about deprecated, but DS is the only dependency injection
> standard in OSGi that respects the dynamic nature of services. CDI,
> blueprint, etc., all have to rely on hacky proxies to emulate support while
> adding nonstandard extensions at times.
>> I posted this to the Karaf forum but it may more appropriately belong
>> here. It's going to be one or the other.
>> Has CDI been deprecated from the OSGi specification. I was hoping to use
>> it in the future instead of Blueprint or DS or in addition to them. I re
>> all last year a new OSGi service export and reference annotations were
>> added. So this surprised me a bit.
>> According to that issue, Camel's CDI support for OSGi doesn't work
>> because CDI on OSGi is deprecated.
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "OPS4J" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - email@example.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.