deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-113] Review and Discuss ServiceHandler
Date Wed, 26 Dec 2012 19:06:49 GMT
Gerhard,

I apologize, I hadn't realized you implemented this feature, considering it
has been assigned to me.

John


On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
gerhard.petracek@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi john,
>
> that can't be - the described example (/excerpt) is a copy of a working
> example (tested with owb and weld).
>
> the only use-case (we have so far) which can't be implemented with std. cdi
> mechanisms (due to abstract classes) is DELTASPIKE-60.
>
> @ InvocationHandler as a separated bean (at runtime):
> currently i can't see a benefit for DELTASPIKE-60.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/12/26 John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
>
> > but the
> > specific one annotated a certain way.  The cleanest way (conceptual
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message