It's not the full story. We for example did never really implement the inconsistent BDA specification, global alternatives etc. Same here.
The CDI-4.0 situation is an inconsistent mess. Even Weld does not implement it fully it seems. I really don't want to be blocked by a mess in the spec. LieGrue, strub > Am 30.01.2023 um 19:02 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > Le lun. 30 janv. 2023 à 17:10, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid > <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de.invalid>> a > écrit : > >> I don't see any reason for any -alpha or whatever release. We did never >> claim to be a certified implementation in the past, nor likely will we in >> the future. We try to pass as much from the TCK as makes sense and >> report/challenge TCK tests which disrespect/contradict the spec wording >> and/or JavaDoc of the API. Most of those challenge tickets have been >> bulk-closed and never really addressed for the past CDI versions. So my >> will to go hunt for the carrot in front of my nose is not infinite >> ("endenwollend" as we say here in Vienna). >> > > We always went the spec side even if we add toggles to disable/enable > things, but ultimately we cover the full API. > Not providing any way to get it means we don't implement CDI anymore, > nothing else. Can be fine but should be promoted and we should also see > with TomEE what it means for them. > Holding a release is not a goal but doing a final which looks like it > covers the spec whereas it does not cover a third of it would be way more > negative for the project IMHO so let's not be the bad guys and just expose > explicitly our state with a pre-final whatever name fits for you. > > >> >> If someone wants to address/implement the CDI-lite functionality (s)he is >> perfectly welcome to do so. I doubt I will find the time to do it. >> > > Once again, no issue to not do it now, should just be a goal of 4.0.0. > > >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >>> Am 30.01.2023 um 14:48 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com >>> : >>> >>> * +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
