While you accept scanning is undefined - Im not sure it can integrate the spec cause all containers do it differently, even a single container can have multiple modes :s - then a type was discovered means nothing except for beans no?
Le 23 juil. 2017 16:09, "Eric Covener" <cove...@gmail.com> a écrit : > 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. >
