[
https://jira.jboss.org/browse/WELDX-187?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Pete Muir closed WELDX-187.
---------------------------
Assignee: Pete Muir
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.0.0.Beta2)
Resolution: Rejected
I'm not convinced for a number of reasons:
* Veto is both a noun and a verb, Vetoed is definitely a the past tense of the
verb veto
* Consistency is not along the "axis" of annotation target, but along
correctness in speech
* Changing the API now is not a good idea (unless critical)
* Consistency with CDI programmatic API (where you call
processAnnotatedType.veto() to veto installation)
* I also think with the annotation you are requesting that an action be taken
(that CDI vetoes the bean deployment)
In many ways @Vetoes would be most consistent IMO, however it looks very
strange.
> Rename (or deprecate) @Veto in favor of @Vetoed
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: WELDX-187
> URL: https://jira.jboss.org/browse/WELDX-187
> Project: Weld Extensions
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Affects Versions: 1.0.0.Beta1
> Reporter: Dan Allen
> Assignee: Pete Muir
>
> All the major type annotations in CDI are adjectives or nouns. For example:
> @Named
> @Decorator
> @Typed
> @Model
> @*Scoped
> @Alternative
> However, @Veto is an action (verb). Thus, to be consistent with the CDI
> naming convention, the @Veto annotation should be renamed to @Vetoed.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
https://jira.jboss.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
_______________________________________________
weld-issues mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-issues
