Anyone know what happened to the 2.0 CDI artifact on Maven Central? It was there last week, but is no longer there...
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 5:54 AM Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: > Thanks for the replies. So unless we hear otherwise from anyone else, I > will plan on supporting just one DI container. > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:54 AM Yoann Rodiere <yo...@hibernate.org> wrote: > >> Same here, compositions don't seem to be a reasonable use case. And even >> if >> users provide a custom bean registry, they could just implement their >> specific behavior for a few specific case, then retrieve another >> implementations on their own and delegate to it however they want. >> Overriding the service initiator looks like a very reasonable way to do >> that. >> >> Regarding the package, "org.hibernate.resource.beans" seems more >> appropriate to me, since CDI is not the only implementation we will get >> and >> we know it. Also, if I wanted to nitpick, injection is not really >> something >> the bean registry must provide. We could imagine a bean registry without >> any support for injection, after all, just providing "monolithic beans". >> It >> would still make sense with respect to your ManagedBeanRegistry API. >> >> >> Yoann Rodière >> Hibernate NoORM Team >> yo...@hibernate.org >> >> On 14 December 2017 at 08:01, Christian Beikov < >> christian.bei...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I don't think someone is actually going to use more than a single DI >> > framework and even if they do, they will probably bridge one way or >> > another between the DI frameworks to be able to access beans from one in >> > the other. >> > >> > So I don't think we should do "compositions" since it's not a big deal >> > to integrate different DIs and is also IMO an edge case. I'd prefer the >> > package name `org.hibernate.resource.di` since CDI seems to be just one >> > of the possible "integrations". >> > >> > >> > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > *Christian Beikov* >> > Am 13.12.2017 um 21:04 schrieb Steve Ebersole: >> > > https://hibernate.atlassian.net/browse/HHH-11259 and friends are >> mainly >> > > about back porting the work I did on 6.0 for the ManagedBeanRegistry >> > > abstraction over dependency injection containers. We will ship >> support >> > for >> > > CDI as well as non-managed beans (things we directly instantiate). Of >> > > course we'd ideally make it easy to plug in other DI containers such >> as >> > > Spring. So I wanted to discuss the configuration of this support. >> > > >> > > The first thing to consider is whether we want to support using >> multiple >> > DI >> > > containers simultaneously. E.g. is it conceivable that an application >> > > might want to use both CDI and Spring simultaneously? I started >> building >> > > in support for that via a CompositeManagedBeanRegistry implementation, >> > but >> > > stepping back I want to gauge whether that is "reasonable" before >> > > continuing down that path >> > > >> > > Assuming that we do want to support such "compositions" the next >> question >> > > is how we see this being configured. Clearly any time a CDI >> BeanManager >> > is >> > > present during bootstrap we want to enable CDI ManagedBeanRegistry >> > > support. How would users indicate additional ManagedBeanRegistry >> impls >> > be >> > > added to the CompositeManagedBeanRegistry? I have opinions about >> this, >> > but >> > > I'd like to hear other's thoughts... >> > > >> > > Note that ManagedBeanRegistry is a service and is initiated >> > > via org.hibernate.resource.cdi.spi.ManagedBeanRegistryInitiator. So >> it >> > > would be possible to completely redefine ManagedBeanRegistry support >> > simply >> > > by replacing that initiator. >> > > >> > > A minor point... notice that the package name here is >> > > `org.hibernate.resource.cdi`, even though one of the goals here is to >> > > support non-CDI ManagedBeanRegistry impls. Do we want to use a >> different >> > > package name? Maybe `org.hibernate.resource.beans`? >> > > ``org.hibernate.resource.di`? ``org.hibernate.resource.injection`? >> > > Other suggestions? I'm actually ok with `org.hibernate.resource.cdi` >> - >> > imo >> > > "cdi" conveys the proper intent. But if others feel strongly it >> should >> > be >> > > something else, I am open to hearing what and why. >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
