@Arne: whats blocking for cdi 1.1? Le 15 nov. 2013 20:20, "Arne Limburg" <arne.limb...@openknowledge.de> a écrit :
> I would not start the 2.0 branch (trunk) now, since we are far away from > implementing CDI 1.1 and may have one or two 1.2.x release up to then. And > we are fine with the cdi11-preview module to implement CDI 1.1 > > So let's discuss the version switch to 2.0 separately. > If no one speaks out loud, I will pick up romains other suggestion and > move to CDI 1.1 for the porting module, changing the dependency of the > tck-module to version 1.2.1 of the porting module. > > Cheers, > Arne > > Am 15.11.13 18:12 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko" unter > <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>: > > >+1 for Romains idea > > > > > >2013/11/15 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > > > >> Hi > >> > >> +1 to set all version to 2.0 and let 1.2 be in maintanance (= replace > >> porting module by CDi 1.1 impl) > >> Romain Manni-Bucau > >> Twitter: @rmannibucau > >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > >> > >> > >> > >> 2013/11/15 Arne Limburg <arne.limb...@openknowledge.de>: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > We are at a point, where we need a porting module for the CDI 1.1 TCK. > >> > From a technical point of view, it would be possible to add the CDI > >>1.1 > >> TCK API to the existing porting module since package names don't clash. > >> > Should we have a separate openwebbeans-cdi11-porting module or should > >>we > >> integrate it into the current module? > >> > Another possible solution would be to fix the version of the > >>dependency > >> in webbeans-tck to 1.2.0 or 1.2.1 and just change the porting module to > >>use > >> CDI 1.1 API. > >> > WDYT? > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Arne > >> > >
