Probably we will require CDI-2.0 in the future. But there was simply no need so far. There was little gain and we would loose backward compatibility. But of course if there is a good argument and a feature we cannot implement without upgrading then we will likely do a 2.0. At least that's my $0.02
LieGrue, strub > Am 05.09.2019 um 04:59 schrieb Daniel Dias Dos Santos > <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > tthanks for the answers . > > Yes work very good using cdi 2.0 . > > I just thought that the cdi 2.0 is default in 1.9.1 > > -- > > *Daniel Dias dos Santos* > Java Developer > SouJava & JCP Member > GitHub: https://github.com/Daniel-Dos > Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/danieldiasjava > Twitter: http://twitter.com/danieldiasjava > > > Em qui, 29 de ago de 2019 às 07:02, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > escreveu: > >> +1 >> >> There was really no need to support any feature after 1.0. >> We have a few things we call via reflection though. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> Am Mittwoch, den 28.08.2019, 21:48 +0200 schrieb Thomas Andraschko: >>> Probably 1.0, but we are compatible with 2.0 >>> >>> Daniel Dias Dos Santos <[email protected]> schrieb am >> Mi., >>> 28. Aug. 2019, 21:24: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I have an doubt about version of CDI in project. >>>> >>>> Currently which version the CDI the deltaspike 1.9.1 that use ? >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >> >>
