I'd agree to #1. I was actually thinking recently about how to re-implement core using CDI 1.1 features. I'll send out a separate email RE that.
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > ok, so I'd say 1. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2014-06-29 0:46 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>: >> no - i contacted esp. one server team months ago and they promised to fix >> it. >> however, the latest release contains fixes for several issues i reported >> except this one. >> (and afaik there won't be any new ee6 release any time soon and an ee7 >> release might take some time as well.) >> >> since we might see similar issues with ee8+, we need a nice approach. >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >> >> >> 2014-06-29 0:09 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>: >> >>> +0 for 1 >>> -1 for 2 (otherwise a single branch will be maintained in practise) >>> are we able to "fix" them? for 3 >>> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau >>> >>> >>> 2014-06-29 0:03 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>: >>> > hi @ all, >>> > >>> > as we have seen e.g. as7 logs exceptions during the startup due to our >>> > optional classes (needed for jsf 2.2+). >>> > since we really need at least some of them (otherwise we would break jsf >>> > 2.2+ applications), we said that users should ignore those log entries >>> > (there is no impact later on). >>> > however, there are other servers which don't ignore it and the deployment >>> > fails. >>> > >>> > we have different options here - e.g.: >>> > #1 special modules once they are needed >>> > #2 one branch per java ee version >>> > #3 keep it as it is (and ignore those servers) >>> > >>> > regards, >>> > gerhard >>>
