Hi Waldemar, this is right, do you want to submit a PR to fix it or do you prefer we fix it straight?
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 à 14:03, Waldemar Reusch <waldemar.reu...@googlemail.com.invalid> a écrit : > Hey guys, > > first time on a mailing list, please bear with me. > > I was trying to test request scoped beans using meecrowave-junit, and the > test kept crashing with the following exception: > > javax.enterprise.context.ContextNotActiveException: WebBeans context with > scope type annotation @RequestScoped does not exist within current thread > at > > org.apache.webbeans.container.BeanManagerImpl.getContext(BeanManagerImpl.java:329) > at > > org.apache.webbeans.intercept.NormalScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.getContextualInstance(NormalScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.java:89) > at > > org.apache.webbeans.intercept.RequestScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.getContextualInstance(RequestScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.java:76) > at > > org.apache.webbeans.intercept.NormalScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.get(NormalScopedBeanInterceptorHandler.java:71) > ... > > While digging, I came across MeecrowaveExtension:getScopes, and while > stepping through I'm realizing that the returned optional will always > contain null, because > - this method is only called in beforeEach, afterEach, therefore > context.getElement() will always return a method instance > - method instances will never have a MeecrowaveConfig annotation, since > that annotation is only allowed for types (MeecrowaveConfig:L35) > > Overriding the MeecrowaveConfig annotation with a local copy which has the > annotation targets {TYPE, METHOD} (instead of TYPE only) allows me to > annotate the tested method with @MeecrowaveConfig(scopes = > RequestScoped.class), which seems to be the intended behavior. > > Is this a known bug? Or am I missing something else? > > best, > Waldemar >
