* +1 to drop jetty plugin for now
* +-0 to shade cdi-api (nobody will consume it anyway)
* -1 to release to not milestone without being spec compliant - including
cdi-lite which is part of cdi-core (even if we all disagree), minimum for
me is to provide an openwebbeans-lite module implementing the cdi extension
making it supported, +1 to get a 4.0.0-alpha1 if it helps


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. 30 janv. 2023 à 14:43, Thomas Andraschko <
andraschko.tho...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> 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
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to