Hi,
thanks for your report and for the reproducer. We will take a look at it and
get back to you soon.
As for WELD-2092, that cannot be the cause of this behaviour because it was
added in Alpha15
and your reproducer breaks with Alpha14 already.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Lar
Alright, we have pinpointed the cause.
It is a regression introduced by fix for WELD-2042.
We have created an issue to track this problem -
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WELD-2179
Keep an eye on that issue so that you know once it is resolved.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: &qu
Correction: I meant to say is is caused by fix for WELD-2043
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
> To: "Larry Streepy"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 8:22:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Example project to
Hi Emily,
the 2.4 release is a continuation of 2.3.x releases.
And you will be able to smoothly upgrade Weld from 2.3 to 2.4.
We simply felt that there will be some more changes included and so
it would be fitting to increase the minor version of project (instead of micro
one).
As for WELD-157
Hi,
first of all let us take this conversation off the cdi list, as it is a Weld
related question (moving to weld-dev list).
Now to your question(s)...
If you could attach a tiny reproducer, this would probably be resolved within
minutes, so if you can send one, do so please.
> Now here's the
Hello Benjamin
Thanks for well written question!
> (You can see the application at was_bugs/was_bug22 at master ·
> thikade/was_bugs · GitHub )
Thanks! Took a glance and it looks like the infamous EAR visibility issue.
> My first thought was that this application should not work
I agree with t
Weld 2.4.4.Final is now released!
For more information, see the new post on Weld website:
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2017/06/14/weld-244Final/
Matej Novotny
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo
Hi Emily,
let us track this in WELD-2402.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Emily Jiang"
> To: "Weld"
> Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:39:59 AM
> Subject: [weld-dev] signed jar proxying
>
> There was a discussion on proxying the signed jars. Can you confirm whether
> Weld can deal
Hi George
Forge addons are far from my range of expertise so I am just going to shoot in
the dark here :)
Make sure you have beans.xml (with discovery mode all and enabled interceptor)
in both JARS - the one which contains the interceptor, as well as the one
trying to use it.
If that doesn't
Hey, folks!
Weld 3.0.1.Final is released.
Feel free to check Weld website for further information -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2017/08/25/weld-301Final/
--
Novotny Matej
Red Hat Czech
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.
Yep, my bad. It should indeed be "will now implement" :)
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "arjan tijms"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Weld" , d...@deltaspike.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 11:38:13 PM
> Subject: Re
Hi Alex,
no need to be sorry, you have come to the right place :)
As for your question, the simplest thing is probably to use qualifiers.
Create your own like this:
@Qualifier
@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target({ ElementType.TYPE, ElementType.PARAMETER, ElementType.FIELD,
ElementType.M
@Inject SimpleFoo you get ambiguous dependency exception
> because both SimpleFoo and AdvancedFoo are eligible for injection.
>
> To resolve this you need to use qualifiers or restrict the bean types of
> AdvancedFoo:
>
> @Typed(AdvancedFoo.class)
> class AdvancedFoo extends Simple
erride
> protected AdvancedFoo newFoo() {
> AdvancedFoo foo = constructing bean with BM;
> return foo;
> }
> }
>
> Thank you for your explanation of Typed. I got it.
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
> Среда, 30 августа 2017, 10:51 +03:00 от Matej Novotny :
>
&g
> not foo = new Foo();
> By other words foo is created in newFoo method, but not calling new operator.
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
>
>
> Среда, 30 августа 2017, 12:45 +03:00 от Matej Novotny :
>
> Hi Alex
>
> What you suggest will inevitably fail for the r
Bugfix release of Weld 2 branch, CDI 1.2, is out.
Check the news post for 2.4.5.Final to learn details -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2017/09/11/weld-245Final/
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/w
Hi Alex
Back there we did some tests with earlier versions of Java 9 and eliminated
some crucial problems.
I think it should be possible to take *existing* app and run it on Java 9.
However, creating a whole new modular project might present some additional
challenges.
Weld itself is not modula
his way.
I might be a bit rusty though; been a while since I played with Java 9.
Please do report back with how this works for you :)
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Alex Sviridov"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 10:28:11 AM
>
weld-se-core-3.0.2-SNAPSHOT.jar
> weld-se-shaded-3.0.2-SNAPSHOT.jar
> weld-spi-3.0.SP1.jar
> weld-core-impl-3.0.2-SNAPSHOT.jar
>
> Is this right configuration? Or should I add/remove something.
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
>
> Понедельник, 18 сентября 2017, 12:41
Factory$1.call(IterativeWorkerTaskFactory.java:62)
> at
> weld.se.shaded@3.0.2-SNAPSHOT/org.jboss.weld.executor.IterativeWorkerTaskFactory$1.call(IterativeWorkerTaskFactory.java:55)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$AdaptedCallable.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1431)
> at java.b
ect.Method.checkCanSetAccessible(Method.java:198)
> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.setAccessible(Method.java:192)
> at
> weld.se.shaded@3.0.2-SNAPSHOT/org.jboss.classfilewriter.ClassFile$1.run(ClassFile.java:256)
> at java.base/java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> at
>
methods of classes in java.base module and JPMS
> doesn't
> allow it.
>
> So, I gave up - as I don't know what to do else. If you can make it work,
> please, report.
> It would be very interesting.
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
>
> Вторник, 19 сентябр
Hi Emily
> "SE". Should the tcks be exercised by JavaEE runtime
No, CDI SE TCK should not be executed on EE environment as it doesn't make much
sense.
(SE tests start their own container instance which doesn't really go together
with EE lifecycle)
> Which profile did you package the JavaSE tck?
Sorry for later answer, yea the only TCK test is the one which Martin pointed
to.
However, I don't see much need to cover this particular case on EE part.
The section of the spec which defines throwing ISE with multiple providers
belongs to SE part of the spec, so it feel natural that it's tested
Weld 3.0.2.Final is out!
Check out release post for more information -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2017/11/23/weld-302Final/
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
Hello,
Weld 2.4.6.Final was released.
There is also a new API, 2.4.SP2, to go along with it.
You can read more about it here ->
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2017/12/18/weld-246Final/
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://li
Hi John,
what you say makes sense, there shouldn't be need for multiple beans.xml.
Does it give you any errors?
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "John D. Ament"
> To: "Weld"
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 4:17:35 PM
> Subject: [weld-dev] Flat Deployment mode & beans.xml
>
> Hi,
be a JavaArchive (no beans.xml added), it will
fail with unsatisfied dep.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
> To: "John D. Ament"
> Cc: "Weld"
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 8:04:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Flat Deploymen
Hello everyone,
as you probably know, Weld 2.4 (CDI 1.2 impl) currently supports even JDK 7.
We are currently considering dropping this limitation and moving to JDK 8 as
minimal version.
>From what we know, some servers (such as WildFly) already require Java 8 to
>even boot up so this limitation
I concluded I will ask on this mail and see if it would be ok to
eventually remove the support.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "John D. Ament"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Weld" , "J J SNYDER"
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 1:
> as Java EE7 requires the minimum Java version being 7.
I was actually trying to find this somewhere.
Can you point to *exactly* where this is stated?
I was unable to find such statement.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Emily Jiang"
> To: "Matej Novotn
Comments inline
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Emily Jiang"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "J J SNYDER" , "Weld" ,
> weld-dev-boun...@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2018 8:55:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] To
Hi Alex,
could you share your code?
Or, ideally, a reproducer?
Your scenario sounds valid to me and so does your deployment.
But I suppose there is a catch somewhere which I cannot glance from just the
description.
Regards,
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Alex Sviridov"
> To: "wel
Hi,
comments inline.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Cc: "Emily Jiang"
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 6:40:27 PM
> Subject: [weld-dev] Potential bug with Typed not affecting if a
> ProducerMethod is proxiable.
>
> Hello
>
Hello everyone,
Weld 2.4.7.Final (CDI 1.2) was released ->
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2018/03/20/weld-247Final
NOTE: With this release, Weld 2 enters maintenance mode; there will be no
further active development on 2.x branch.
Regards
Matej
___
we
Hi Alex,
Not sure if I get what you need to do, but I'll take a shot at it.
What about using @PostConstruct interceptor, in which you take the injected
Application bean and use it to set internal state in SomeManagerImpl?
Same could be done directly within constructor (with @Inject annotation) or
Weld 3.0.4.Final is out and so is Weld API 3.0.SP3 which goes along with it.
See also release announcement -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2018/04/26/weld-304Final/
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman
Hi Gordon,
running the test on WFLY (or actually without EE container) gives me the same
stacktrace, however the test passes for me.
What is it you fail on exactly?
Debugging a bit shows that @ShouldThrowException annotation (which is guarding
the exception in the test) goes through a whole cha
- Original Message -
> From: "Martin Kouba"
> To: "Matej Novotny" , "Gordon Hutchison"
>
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 8:41:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] CDI 2.0 TCK ObserverMethodWithoutNotifyMet
Hi Alex,
in short, there is no official documentation on that because Weld runs in
"classpath mode".
JDK 9 and 10 are short-termed releases and will have no special support.
JDK 11 is something we should be looking at and we are doing that (lately we
added support to avoid illegal access there
Comments inline
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Alex Sviridov"
> To: "Matej Novotny" , "weld-dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 2:09:56 PM
> Subject: Re[2]: [weld-dev] Weld and JPMS
>
> Hi Matej,
>
> Thank you for such
-modules do you need to depend on.
I haven't tried this though, so take what I say with a pinch of salt.
If you do some testing, I'll be glad to hear the results as well.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Alex Sviridov"
> To: "Matej Novotny" , "weld
Weld 2.x is NOT to be executed with Java 9+.
Use Weld 3, please. Best use latest release of course (3.0.4.Final).
If you can share the test project on GH, that would be neat as well.
Then we could see how you use weld as auto module (as well as many other
configurations) and go from there.
As fo
Hi,
what does user code look like?
Does he have an event listener?
I'd say this depends on *precisely* what is his code bound to.
At some point (after the invalidation), you should be getting
ContextNotActiveException so I guess we need to know more about the code to
determine this.
If the user
Hello,
Weld 3.0.5.Final was released along with Weld API 3.0.SP4 (and CDI API 2.0.SP1).
For more information, check our release notes ->
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2018/07/26/weld-305Final/
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
ht
Hi Benjamin,
CDI spec allows you to inject BM as a method parameter in an extension.
There are only limitations on what methods you can/cannot invoke on BM object
in certain point during bootstrap (e.g. in certain observer methods).
Those should be covered here -
http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2
Probe too early.
You can do that via `org.jboss.weld.probe.invocationMonitor.excludeType`
property as described in Weld docs -
http://docs.jboss.org/weld/reference/latest-master/en-US/html_single/#config-dev-mode
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
&g
Hi James,
a conversation is identified by its ID and if it is already active, you should
be adding the 'cid' parameter with proper value to your requests[1].
This of course requires the conversation to be long-running which I assume you
have.
Is this what you meant?
Matej
github.com/weld/core/pull/1866
(and Weld issue is https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WELD-2524 if I haven't
mentioned that previously)
Regards
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
> To: "Benjamin Confino"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org, "
Hi
Looking at spec 11.3.6. Obtaining a Bean by type[1] I can see that the
paragraph ends with "according to the rules for candidates of typesafe
resolution defined in Performing typesafe resolution.".
The important word here is *candidates* IMO.
The way typesafe resolution is defined, both the
Hello,
maintenance release of Weld 2.4 is out.
For more information, please refer to
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2018/09/26/weld-248Final/
Regards
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-
Hi Laird,
I just wonder, what is it you are ultimately trying to achieve with contexts
since you are diving this deep?
That is, if it's not classified ;)
Comments inline...
M
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "Martin Kouba"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Frida
Hello,
Weld 3.1.0.Beta1 was released yesterday.
Along with bunch of other fixes[1] and/or features, this release contains first
API for CDI context propagation.
Weld docs[2] contain more information on how to do that along with an example.
If you have a use case for this, please give it a spin.
Hello Karen,
Is your code public on GitHub (or somewhere else)?
It would be easier to try and help you if I could see the code.
>From just the description I don't really understand how do you leverage CDI in
>your design and which bits work and which don't.
Regards
Matej
- Original Message
.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0/cdi-spec.html
Hope this sheds at least some light.
I can of course try to answer your more specific questions, just this one is a
bit too broad :)
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Karen Goh"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: wel
Weld 3.1.0.Final has been released, part of the release is also new 3.1.Final
API.
This version brings few new features such as CDI context propagation SPI,
InterceptionFactory on interfaces and more.
Part of it are SPI changes which affect all integrators, please read our
announcement post for
Hello,
new maintenance release of Weld is now available - Weld 3.1.1.Final.
Take a look at release notes for more details -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2019/05/07/weld-311Final/
Regards
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https:/
Hello,
I am not quite sure I follow what are you trying to achieve here.
I can see you are trying to register a synthetic interceptor via
WeldAfterBeanDiscovery.addInterceptor().
What I am missing is how do you bind this interceptor to your
PostConstructInjectionEJBResource?
Because interceptor
the interceptor has the same binding and is enabled
(has priority), then you should be good.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Rebecca Searls"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 2:13:04 PM
> Subje
Hello,
new Weld version is available - Weld 3.1.2.Final and Weld API 3.1.SP1.
It is mainly bug fixing version, you can read more here -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2019/08/06/weld-312Final/
Regards
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss
Hello Kurt,
Weld is licensed under ASL2 as can be seen here -
https://github.com/weld/core/blob/master/LICENSE
I've looked into the code history of some of the files you have listed and
there was some moving of files between weld projects so following that isn't
exactly easy.
I believe the lic
Weld 3.1.3.Final is out along with Weld API 3.1.SP2.
More information can be found here -
http://weld.cdi-spec.org/news/2019/11/28/weld-313Final/
Have a great day!
Matej
___
weld-dev mailing list
weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/
Hello,
thanks for the PR. We're totally missing the stream closing statement there.
I take it you verified that this fixes the problem in Liberty?
Otherwise, master branch (Weld 3.1) is totally where these PRs should go.
As for 3.0, we do not plan any releases there, we are going forward with jus
Hello,
I'd start by pointing you to CDI TCK as that's a good starting point to see
what's covered.
For your question, that would be this test -
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/cdi-tck/blob/master/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss/cdi/tck/tests/context/conversation/ClientConversationContextTest.java#L
.github.com/manovotn/b9e9fde25ab77b5e481d5b34edf02b0c#file-conversationbean-java-L10-L16
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Takayuki T Ishii" , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 12:06:14 P
2
If you could try that and tell me if it works, that would be great.
Although I did use the same reproducer, so hopefully it'll work ;-)
Regards and have a nice weekend!
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
>
gt; From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Takayuki T Ishii" , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 4:56:14 PM
> Subject: RE: [weld-dev] Question about conversations scope initilization
> obeserver
>
> Hello M
Hi,
good catch! Go ahead and send the PRs, I'll reopen that WELD issue and link
them to it.
Also, please add a test for this (basically just enhance the one I had in
https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1962/files).
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: weld-dev@lis
Thanks!
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Takayuki T Ishii" , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 11:35:26 AM
> Subject: RE: [weld-dev] Follow up to WELD-2611
&g
Hello Laird,
the two bullet points IMO do not have an overlap, e.g. your bean can be an
array type but there is no (un)boxing there, or it can be a primitive type in
which case there is (un)boxing.
As for section 5.2.1, it says:
> The bean has a bean type that matches the required type. For thi
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 5:35:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Clarification question on CDI specification section
> 2.2.1
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 1:34 AM Ma
Hi,
so I think (I wasn't there at the time so I cannot really remember it :)) the
name `getSuperInterface` or `getSuperClass`on `Proxies.TypeInfo` class comes
from the fact that these method return you a class/interfaces that is a direct
superclass for the proxy class you are creating.
E.g. thi
Hello,
first and foremost, these are purely internal mechanics. There is no guarantee
in CDI spec or Weld docs on how the proxies should look like.
Or even on the proxies being identical from one run to another, they are an
abstraction that is hidden for the most part and can be unwrapped if nee
ing in common).
With that the proxy will look more sensibly. You also won't need to replace
package names as any class coming from user app will be legit (of course they
can still have producers on java.* types though).
Still, your example is a good one as it demonstrates the inconsistency that
Hello,
what you are describing looks like a user error. Basically, for a given
scenario it can be uncertain who's handling injection and I can imagine some
cases where there can be race between then two frameworks.
Side note - Validator doesn't have EJB dependency and we don't want to add it
a
Hi Scott,
this question is a better fit for weld-dev mailing list, so adding that to Cc.
I was about to start a conversation on something similar as this has been on my
TODO list for some time.
I am after information on how to get in touch with GF team - about how they
execute TCKs (namely CDI
+1 to what Martin says, I've seen similar scenarios.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Martin Kouba"
> To: "Emily Jiang" , "Benjamin Confino"
>
> Cc: "Weld-Dev List"
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 12:53:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Validating for fields that are annotated with
g/jboss/arquillian/testenricher/cdi/CDIInjectionEnricher.java#L37
[2] https://github.com/weld/core/pull/1956
[3] https://github.com/weld/api/pull/91
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Stark"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "cdi-dev" , "weld-dev"
d-arq. container and
then (3) weld api and core.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Stark"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 2:34:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot b
Hmm, I am not sure I am on that list, even though I am pretty sure I applied
earlier. Will try again.
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Stark"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 3:32:07 PM
> Subject:
Awesome, thanks a lot!
I'll soon be going off for the weekend, so on Mon I can pick that up and try to
put it all together locally and see what's the issue.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Stark"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "weld-
hickens and eggs everywhere :)
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
> To: "Scott Stark"
> Cc: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 5:04:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot
> bui
al Message -
> From: "Scott Stark"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 5:56:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] [cdi-dev] How would I go about getting a snapshot
> build of Weld out?
>
> Ok, looking at comments. Y
caffeine? :)
Matej
_
[1] https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0/cdi-spec.html#assignable_parameters
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 5:20:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Odd type assignability test
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:27 AM Matej Novotny < manov...@redhat.com > wrote:
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 5:51:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Odd type assignability test
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:38 AM Martin Kouba < mko...@redhat.com > wrote:
>
>
> I think that you're right. Foo is basic
_
[1] https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CDI-389
[2] https://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/2013-July/004283.html
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-405
- Original Message -
> From: "Matej Novotny"
> To: &quo
Hi,
I'll take a look later today.
Note that master branch is no longer Weld 3.x, it is 4.x (Jakarta EE 9) and the
CI there is going bonkers yet as I am in the middle of changing it.
If you want to file a PR against Weld 3, you can use 3.1 branch for that.
Regards
Matej
- Original Message --
No, master will need to consume same fixes anyway, so it is better to have the
PR up.
The only downside is that EE container based tests cannot be run there (there
is no EE container for Jakarta 9 yet).
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "
ards
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org, "Allan Zhang" , "Shinji
> Ohtsuka" , "Emily Jiang"
>
> Sent:
ge -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Shinji Ohtsuka" , "Emily Jiang"
> , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org, "Allan
> Zhang"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 3:59:30 PM
> Subject: RE: [weld-dev] Propagation of
--- Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Allan Zhang"
> Cc: "Matej Novotny" , "Shinji Ohtsuka"
> , "Emily Jiang"
> , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2020 12:41:01 PM
> Subject: RE: [w
Original Message -
> From: "Benjamin Confino"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Shinji Ohtsuka" , "Emily Jiang"
> , weld-dev@lists.jboss.org, "Allan
> Zhang"
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 11:02:04 PM
> Subject: RE: [weld-d
d a WELD issue for it -
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/WELD-2626
Feel free to send PRs.
Regards
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Allan Zhang"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "Benjamin Confino" , "Shinji Ohtsuka"
> , "Emily Jiang"
&g
ou stumble on a wildcard, it should
become illegal bean type.
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 6:16:04 PM
> Subject: Legal bean type question
>
> Hello; I had a legal bean type qu
> To: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2020 2:57:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Legal bean type question
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 1:27 AM Matej Novotny < manov...@redhat.com > wrote:
>
>
> Once again, please post questions like these to weld-dev m
lds.
With this you still don't know if it is a valid bean for IP of type
`List>` or `List>`?
Regards
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Laird Nelson"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: "weld-dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2020 4:58:13 PM
Hello,
the date is not set in stone, we could probably do it earlier.
Is there any particular thing in Alpha3 that you rely on?
I was hoping to resolve WELD-2630 before going into another release.
And for that I need to look into Undertow compatibility and also Tomcat 10
testing options.
Matej
r.ibm.com/wasdev/
> https://www.ibm.com/cloud/websphere-application-platform
>
> Phone: +44-1962-817677 | ITN: 37247677
> E-mail: tev...@uk.ibm.com
> Desk: Hursley DS1 J2
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mailpoint 211
> IBM United Kingdom Limited
> Hursley Park, Winches
Hello,
Weld 4.0.0.Alpha3 should land in Central any time soon.
If you encounter any problems with it, let us know.
Regards
Matej
- Original Message -
> From: "Tom Evans"
> To: "Matej Novotny"
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
