Contexts & Dependency Injection for Java

CDI EG meeting 12/02/2013 notes on CDI 1.2 MR

Posted by Antoine Sabot-Durand on Dec 02, 2013 | Comments

The following people assisted this meeting :

  • Pete Muir (pm)

  • Mark Struberg (ms)

  • Jozef Hartinger (jh)

  • Joseph Bergmark (jb)

  • Phil Zampino (pz) (Java EE EG member)

  • JJ Snyder (jj)

  • Antoine Sabot-Durand (asd)

Proposed Agenda

The following agenda was proposed

  1. Feed back on Java EE EG conf call we had on tuesday

  2. Issues discussion : 9 issues where proposed

Feedback on Java EE EG meeting

To sum up :

  • Java EE EG is ok with our MR roadmap :

    • 16th Dec - list of issues complete

    • 6th Jan - Maintenance review starts

    • 7th March - Maintenance review ends

    • 21st March - Maintenance ballot ends

  • According to JCP rules on update, we are going for CDI 1.2 (not 1.1.1)

  • Regarding ticket CDI-370 (Expand @RequestScoped and @SessionScoped to account for WebSocket) we agree that job should be done in Websocket Spec. So asd will work with Stuart Douglas to bring this point to the Websocket EG. The direct consequence for our MR is that CDI-370 is not in and should be closed after we check that Websocket EG got the point on their side.

  • We also talk about classloader issue that were raised during CDI-377 (automatic JSR-330 annotation processing problematic). EG members agreed that it’s a good point but very difficult to resolve. It could only be solve in a major EE release.

Issues discussion

The discussion around the proposed ticket was quite straight forward. The result is in the table below

Jira Description Decision Note


Reword the description of @RequestScoped and @ApplicationScoped in section 2.4.1

in MR


Clarify the meaning of "bean class local view"

in MR


Clarify that an array with a variable component type or parameterized component type containing wildcards is not a valid bean type

in MR


Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called

in MR


Two examples in section 5.2.4 contradict the rules of the same section

in MR


Clarify interceptors are not associated with the result of a producer method/field

in MR


Additional implementations of Request Context

in MR

we should add general statement telling that extension can change the behavior of built-in scope


Clarify life cycle of RequestScoped

out MR

each spec should detail how they stick to built-in scope


Clarify what happens when the user creates a unbound recursive injection with Dependent scoped beans

out MR

Container doesn’t have to support this : the ticket should be closed


EG has still 8 issues to discuss (inluding CDI-377). We should close the list as planned on mid-december.