openwebbeans-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: Question on Interceptors and CDI specifications/versions
Date Sun, 09 Nov 2014 06:54:13 GMT
+1 

If this is about MDBs or @Scheduled methods then it has not much to do with CDI but rather
with the EJB container.

I also think it should work as per the spec. You might need to file a PMR for this.



LieGrue,
strub


On Sunday, 9 November 2014, 6:50, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:


>
>
>Ok
>This is the responsability of the ejb container, not cdi. IIRC it should work as well.
>
>Le 9 nov. 2014 00:41, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <itsmeden@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>Hi Mark 
>>We have the beans.xml in place, will check the private and exception on monday when
Im back to office.
>>Regards 
>>Lars-Fredrik 
>>On Nov 8, 2014 11:13 PM, "Mark Struberg" <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Lars-Fredrik!
>>>
>>> @AroundInvoke is indeed supported in CDI-1.0 and thus also in WAS. I'm using
it heavily at some customers . Do you have a beans.xml in WEB-INF? WAS needs this (not required
by the spec, but anyway).
>>> Probably WAS has a problem with private around-invoke methods. You might also
check if your method declares 'throws Exception'. This is required by the spec ans WAS is
pretty picky about it.
>>>
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, 8 November 2014, 17:42, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Just a doubt: you asked about around invoke but spoke about timeout. Timeout
should be supported IIRC but we did it after several releases ie not 1.0.
>>> >Le 8 nov. 2014 15:02, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <itsmeden@gmail.com>
a écrit :
>>> >
>>> >Thanks Romain.... then I will submit a bugreport....
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>/Fredrik
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>Iirc aroundinvoke was supported since the beginning
>>> >>>Le 8 nov. 2014 14:05, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <itsmeden@gmail.com>
a écrit :
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> @Romain
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>I know WAS uses OWB and, as you say, some obsolete version.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>I was just curios in what CDI and OWB version the support was
added. If I try to bug report something that is not in Java EE 6 I will get the cold hand
I guess :)
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>It is in tomee and by spec. No idea in WAS which has obsolete
versions
>>> >>>>>Le 8 nov. 2014 13:47, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <itsmeden@gmail.com>
a écrit :
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>Hi!
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>As I can see JSR318 contains two specifications, EJB
3.1 Specification and Interceptors 1.1 (and later on Interceptors 1.2 MR)
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>EJB 3.1 as well as Interceptors 1.1 are included in Java
EE6.
>>> >>>>>>Interceptors 1.2 is included in Javav EE7.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>When I look in Inteceptors Specification 1.1 I find no
references to a specific CDI version or to CDI at all.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>When I look in Interceptors Specification 1.2 I see the
following:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>1.2 Relationship to Other Specifications
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>"...and the CDI specification requires support for the
chapters 2,3 and 5 (excluding 5.5)."
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>CDI specification here points to "JSR346 - Context and
Dependency Injection for the Java EE Platform 1.1 (CDI specification)"
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>2.7 Timeout Method Inteceptors
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>"Interceptor methods that interpose on timeout methods
are denoted by the AroundTimeout annotation."
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>"Around-timeout methods can have public, private, protected
or package level access. An around-timeout method must not be declared as abstract, final
or static."
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Question:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>1) From the Interceptors 1.2 I understand that @AroundInvoke
is okay to use with a CDI interceptor using CDI 1.1, correct?
>>> >>>>>>2) What about CDI 1.0 (JSR 299) and Interceptors 1.1,
is @AroundInvoke also okay with CDI 1.0? I find no information on that?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>The reason I ask is that I do not get it to work with
WebSphere 8.5.5 that uses OWB (with a version that atleast should support CDI 1.0).
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Regards
>>> >>>>>>Lars-Fredrik
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>--
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
>>> >>>>>>The information contained in this electronic message
and any
>>> >>>>>>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive
use of the
>>> >>>>>>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged
information. If
>>> >>>>>>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik
Smedberg
>>> >>>>>>immediately at itsmeden@gmail.com, and destroy all copies
of this
>>> >>>>>>message and any attachments.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>--
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
>>> >>>>The information contained in this electronic message and any
>>> >>>>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use
of the
>>> >>>>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information.
If
>>> >>>>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik
Smedberg
>>> >>>>immediately at itsmeden@gmail.com, and destroy all copies of
this
>>> >>>>message and any attachments.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>--
>>> >>
>>> >>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
>>> >>
>>> >>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
>>> >>
>>> >>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
>>> >>The information contained in this electronic message and any
>>> >>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
>>> >>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If
>>> >>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
>>> >>immediately at itsmeden@gmail.com, and destroy all copies of this
>>> >>message and any attachments.
>>> >
>>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message