I would prefer that we avoid to use XML. Otherwise, end users will be confused about what a CDI / CDI Extension should looks like and why we are moving one step down to do what Spring / Xbean are doing.
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>wrote: > Why i would like to use files (i find xml too verbose) is for constants > (uri for instance) or alternative/interceptor (as mentionned) > > Today i find other use case the translation of bad design > > ...just my opinion maybe > Le 7 sept. 2012 23:01, "Jason Porter" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > Mark, Pete and I discussed a little bit about the XML config (from > Solder) > > on IRC today. We quickly decided that we needed to move over to the > mailing > > list for more input, and to make things official. > > > > As things currently exist in the Solder XML Config, it's probably not > > portable and would really need some of the changes in CDI 1.1 to work > > properly. We also discussed throwing out the idea of completely > configuring > > beans via XML and using the XML config for other tasks such as applying > > interceptors and the like via regex or similar ideas, in other words > having > > it being a subset of what currently exists today. What is in Solder is > very > > similar to configuring beans via XML in Spring, and we feel that paradigm > > has sailed. > > > > I'm starting this thread to get some other ideas about what we should do > > for XML config and also see what people think. > > > > -- > > Jason Porter > > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com > > http://twitter.com/lightguardjp > > > > Software Engineer > > Open Source Advocate > > Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling > > > > PGP key id: 926CCFF5 > > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu > > > -- Charles Moulliard Apache Committer / Sr. Pr. Consultant at FuseSource.com Twitter : @cmoulliard Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
