Overall same view here. How hard is it to make it 1.2 compliant? Le lun. 23 avr. 2018 à 12:25, John D. Ament <[email protected]> a écrit :
> MP has made it very clear they don't care about portable libraries, and > only care about the vendor provided solutions. The requirement is that > vendors provide a CDI 1.2 runtime to use. Liberty provides a way to switch > between them (1.2, 2.0). I think Swarm may have moved to 2.0; not sure. > > I think Safeguard also compiles against CDI 2.0, but I don't think I'm > using any 2.0 features in it so it may run properly against 1.2. > > Personally, if we have a user who wants it for 1.2, and the effort is > minimal we should appease that user to help build out the community. > > John > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 2:17 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> current codebase uses cdi 2.0 which means it can be used on tomee, >> meecrowave, openwebbeans etc... >> >> Rudy opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6604 to move >> it to cdi 1.2 - BTW "Microprofile depends on CDI 1.2, so using 2.0 is >> wrong." is wrong since some years you can always use a version *>=* of the >> minimum requirement for spec impls. >> Technically I don't see a strong need to do it but I'd like to get your >> feeling about it to know what we do of the issue. >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >> >
