[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] about the status of atinject

Hi Mark

Would atinject retain independent spec or do you want include in CDI spec ?

Personality, i prefer first solution. CDI remain a solution top of DI.
Other implementation could use DI of JakartaEE (Spring, Guice, ...)

Before we fork jsr330, couldn't we ask to maintainer of project to transfer jsr330 to JakartaEE ?
Mailing-list of EG is https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/atinject-observer

Regards, Lilian.

Le 09/05/2019 19:31, Mark Struberg a ÃcritÂ:
Good afternoon!

Had an interesting discussion with David Blevins today.
It seems that atinject (JSR-330) is not part of the JavaEE donation
from Oracle to the Eclipse Foundation.

This is likely correct as Oracle doesn't own any IP in javax.inject -
except the name 'java' in javax.
All the rest of the work is owned by the community which drove
atinject. That is Bob Lee, Gavin King, Paul Hammant, JÃrgen HÃller
maybe. I was loosely involved on the CDI side of the fence, so I
roughly remember the people involved but likely misse some.
Main point: ALL the work (javadocs, code, 'spec') is Apache License v2
licensed. So it is all perfectly fine to be forked.

Why would we like to fork javax.inject?
In the CDI spec we always wanted to further harmonise things. Like
bringing the @Nonbinding annotation over to atinject (where it belongs
to, also already talked to Spring guys about it). Or enhance the
@Scope annotation.

Atinject is a very core spec to JakartaEE. And neither Oracle (they
don't touch anything they fully own) nor we (due to 'java' in the
packagename) could enhance not a tiny bit in atinject.

So do we also want to move javax.inject to jakarta.inject while we're at it?

So far I'd strongly favour it.

What do others think?

jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit