On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 8:13 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > We should probably review on cdi-dev. I believe the intention behind > saying "classes discovered" [1] is to indicate that its for all classes, > not just eligible beans. Here's a use case: I have framework specific > classes, where the developer isn't required to add a scope. Framework adds > the scope for them. To do that, they use bean-discovery-mode=annotated and > PAT will add the dependent or other scope as appropriate. > > [1]: > https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#process_annotated_type > > On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 5:40 PM Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> > wrote: > >> In that case Romain is right. >> >> In an implicit BDA you only get PAT if the class has a bean defining >> annotation. >> Thats the reason we introduced all+trim.
John alluded to changing, not adding, a beans.xml in the OP, so IIUC if it did not contain bean-discovery-mode=all + trim then it seems to me that the type should have been processed.
