I'm thinking that the old annotations can be supported in terms of the javax.inject API. As for requiring a jar, that's why I've also suggested just adopting the annotations into our own package somewhere.
Either way this is done, my general goal is to untangle other areas in the core API that could benefit from generic DI support. See for example turning Configuration into a plugin. On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:40, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I don’t see how that relates. The proposal as I understand it is to replace > the existing annotations with annotations from javax.inject, which would > require a JEE jar. > > Ralph > > > On Oct 8, 2019, at 1:31 PM, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:26 PM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> IIUC this will require a dependency on a Java EE jar? For that reason > >> alone, no. > > > > Don't think so. A simple (mostly JSR 330 compliant) provider can be > > implemented in a few classes: > > > > https://github.com/jochenw/afw/tree/master/afw-core/src/main/java/com/github/jochenw/afw/core/inject/simple > > > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
