Comment #28 on issue 258 by gili.tzabari: [Patch] custom annotation based injection points http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=258
Jesse, I think we've all misunderstood James' point. He doesn't object to the package names but rather to the difficulty of migrating across different IoC implementations. If the standard @Resource annotation is "good enough" to cover the Guice implementation why *shouldn't* we be using it instead of defining our own? That is, Guice should use existing annotations/interfaces as much as possible instead of generating our own (again, when it is reasonable). -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
