This content has been marked as final.
Show 1 reply
-
1. Re: Web Beans 27 May 2009 feedback
gavin.king May 29, 2009 11:12 PM (in response to genman)A standard schema document and URL for
beans.xml
would be useful. Some sort of version attribute might be appropriate to introduce to the root element as well, similar to other JEE XML document.Right, and this will be part of the RI. It's not needed in the prose specification.
12.4 - Mostly for testing and mocking, it's useful to have no argument constructors for exceptions. So I hope they are included for every Exception.
OK, I added two constructors to InjectionException to match those declared on java.lang.RuntimeException.
B.4 - Suggest adding ConversationException, parent of BusyConversationException, etc.
Hrm, unless you have a specific usecase in mind, I would prefer not to add an additional type in this release. If this turns out to be a mistake, we can fix it in a maintenance release.
B.8 - The annotation names @Production and @Produces seem potentially confusing.
I don't want to change these names at this stage.
11.2.8/9/10 - Seems like a removeBean()/Observer/Context would be useful as well. Having a way to add beans into a deployment suggests there should be a way to remove them. Maybe the semantics would be too hard to define and might be appropriate for the next release?
Yes, this doesn't seem like something that we need to do in this release.