Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] [jakartaee-ambassadors] Re: Jakarta EE Backlog -> Guide to Jakarta EE 10

Hello Andy,

Thanks for the clarification. I see what you're saying. I guess the key thing is that I'd want it to be implemented in such a way that end users don't have to use CDI. 

I'm specifically thinking of frameworks like DropWizard, which, although they use JAX-RS annotations, the general programming model does not use any DI. Even though I personally prefer a CDI-based programming model, I think it's important to allow the community to build frameworks that use JAX-RS and don't have a CDI-based programming model.

Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Java Champion | Google Developer Expert | LinkedIn
Expert training and consulting: PrimeFaces, PrimeNG, JSF, Java EE, Web Components, Angular
Virtua, Inc. | 

* Enterprise development, front and back. Listen to

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:28 PM Andy McCright <j.andrew.mccright@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is JAX-RS going to require CDI? I'm not sure that's a good idea. Some frameworks use those annotations without any DI. 

Yes, the plan is for JAX-RS to require CDI.  See

JAX-RS 3.1 - PLANNED - (Q2 or Q3 2020) - Java SE Bootstrap API. Deprecating @Context: Implementors MUST provide CDI; applications MAY use CDI....
JAX-RS 4.0 - PLANNED (2021) - Removing @Context: Applications MUST use CDI

Can you elaborate on the drawbacks to using CDI?  The footprint (in general) should not increase since JAX-RS has its own DI framework - it's this framework that causes conflicts and increased footprint in environments where both JAX-RS and CDI are used.  By removing JAX-RS's DI framework and delegating injection to CDI, this should reduce footprint and complexity - both for vendors and users.



On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:26 PM arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 5:53 PM Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Isn't there a @RolesAllowed in Jakarta Security and the idea would be to deprecate it in Jakarta REST in favor of that?
If Security needed a little more modularity or a "light" module where Authentication or Authorization may not always be required, I guess that is also something to explore.

Both Authentication and Authorization are very small SPIs, and they are exactly meant for vendors to implement a few things of so that Jakarta Security works on whatever environment. Something like say MP JWT takes about the same to implement from scratch as Jakarta Authentication or Authorization (I know, since I implemented all three ;)).

Kind regards, 
Arjan Tijms

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit
_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top