Hi, It's good for me too.
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 10:43 Thomas Andraschko <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > all sounds good to me > > Am Mo., 30. Jan. 2023 um 14:41 Uhr schrieb Mark Struberg > <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid>: > > > hi folks! > > > > We are up and running with passing most CDI-4.0 TCK tests. > > There are a few areas where we have excluded some tests: > > > > * CDI-lite. I'll not gonna implement this in OWB as it is purely for > > Quarkus and I don't care. It should be straight forward to implement the > > functionality as OWB plugin if someone really needs it though. > > * Some challenged tests, some unspecified behaviour in some tests. E.g. > > they assume a specified order class annotations before method annotations > > for Interceptors. But the spec *explicitly* says that for Interceptors > with > > the same @Priority the order is unspecified. > > * backward incompatible reversing the default bean-discovery-mode for > > empty beans.xmls. I'll not gonna implement this as it also did break the > > JakartaEE rules alltogether. > > > > > > Things I want to change yet before the release: > > > > * Decide about the jetty9 plugin. Tbh I'd keep it excluded until someone > > wants to contribute fixes to it. > > * provide a shaded version of the CDI api jar without all the CDI-lite > > parts. > > > > > > Wdyt? > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > >
