openwebbeans-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Laird Nelson <ljnel...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: @Intercepted Bean<?> failure
Date Mon, 17 Dec 2018 18:20:45 GMT
The same "stack" works fine with Weld.  Still digging.

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 9:21 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:

> The test reproduces the abstraction and the registration does not change
> the code path so it can be a "bad stack" which would make the OWB
> BeanMetadataProducer not finding the bean?
>
>
> 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>
>
>
> Le lun. 17 déc. 2018 à 18:09, Laird Nelson <ljnelson@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 12:12 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Laird,
>>>
>>> I didn't manage to reproduce with this test:
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but that test is different from the structure and usage of the
>> Narayana transaction componentry in many ways.  For example, the Narayana
>> extension adds the interceptor types as annotated types (i.e. does not call
>> addInterceptor()), and the interceptedBean field is in a base class, not
>> the actual interceptor.  I don't know why (or if) this would make a
>> difference, of course, but using the Narayana extension does indeed fail
>> under OpenWebBeans.  I'll continue digging.
>>
>> Best,
>> Laird
>>
>

Mime
View raw message