On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Nourredine Khadri < nourredine.kha...@atos.net> wrote:
> >I do believe that the same could be said for tapestry-cdi and by > extension FlowLogix > >Magnus, can you comment on this? > I think that you have to rely on a specific container's implementation > to exclude classes from scanning and avoid conficts between CDI and > Tapestry IOC. I can be wrong. This was container specific, but remember reading somewhere that it would be a standard way to specify exclusions in cdi 1.1. Couldn't find the reference, but here is a commit though: https://github.com/pmuir/cdi/commit/a4061ffd0ef52e4028e8cb5727335e7e25f1d493 tapestry-cdi should be portable across containers, think there was only an issue when including a beans.xml in tapestry app where the weld extensions could be used.
