Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
Le lun. 30 janv. 2023 à 21:27, Mark Struberg a écrit : > It's not the full story. > We for example did never really implement the inconsistent BDA > specification, global alternatives etc. > Same here. > But we implemented all api, here it is way more obvious it is wrong since it is having CDI

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Mark Struberg
It's not the full story. We for example did never really implement the inconsistent BDA specification, global alternatives etc. Same here. The CDI-4.0 situation is an inconsistent mess. Even Weld does not implement it fully it seems. I really don't want to be blocked by a mess in the spec.

[jira] [Commented] (OWB-1417) Implement CDI-4.0 spec

2023-01-30 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau (Jira)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1417?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17682218#comment-17682218 ] Romain Manni-Bucau commented on OWB-1417: - For future readers: core minus lite part as of today. >

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
Le lun. 30 janv. 2023 à 17:10, Mark Struberg a écrit : > I don't see any reason for any -alpha or whatever release. We did never > claim to be a certified implementation in the past, nor likely will we in > the future. We try to pass as much from the TCK as makes sense and > report/challenge TCK

[jira] [Resolved] (OWB-1417) Implement CDI-4.0 spec

2023-01-30 Thread Mark Struberg (Jira)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-1417?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Mark Struberg resolved OWB-1417. Assignee: Mark Struberg Resolution: Fixed CDI-4.0 core is now fully working. There are a few

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Mark Struberg
I don't see any reason for any -alpha or whatever release. We did never claim to be a certified implementation in the past, nor likely will we in the future. We try to pass as much from the TCK as makes sense and report/challenge TCK tests which disrespect/contradict the spec wording and/or

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Romain Manni-Bucau
* +1 to drop jetty plugin for now * +-0 to shade cdi-api (nobody will consume it anyway) * -1 to release to not milestone without being spec compliant - including cdi-lite which is part of cdi-core (even if we all disagree), minimum for me is to provide an openwebbeans-lite module implementing the

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Daniel Dias Dos Santos
Hi, It's good for me too. On Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 10:43 Thomas Andraschko wrote: > all sounds good to me > > Am Mo., 30. Jan. 2023 um 14:41 Uhr schrieb Mark Struberg > : > > > hi folks! > > > > We are up and running with passing most CDI-4.0 TCK tests. > > There are a few areas where we have

Re: [DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Thomas Andraschko
all sounds good to me Am Mo., 30. Jan. 2023 um 14:41 Uhr schrieb Mark Struberg : > hi folks! > > We are up and running with passing most CDI-4.0 TCK tests. > There are a few areas where we have excluded some tests: > > * CDI-lite. I'll not gonna implement this in OWB as it is purely for >

[DISCUSS] Release OWB-4.0.0?

2023-01-30 Thread Mark Struberg
hi folks! We are up and running with passing most CDI-4.0 TCK tests. There are a few areas where we have excluded some tests: * CDI-lite. I'll not gonna implement this in OWB as it is purely for Quarkus and I don't care. It should be straight forward to implement the functionality as OWB