Re: [cdi-dev] CDI future - problems and proposal

[arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 12:09 PM Ladislav Thon <lthon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

or in retrospect shouldn't be in CDI
in the first place. Things like:

- decorators
- specialization
- session scope
- conversation scope
- passivation
- non-contextual injection

I always felt that just JSR 330/AtInject was way too small, while JSR 299/CDI might have been a tad too big. My personal pet peeve is the fact that CDI includes build-in beans for several Servlet types, such as HttpServletRequest. We tried hard before to get that out of CDI and into Servlet. Likewise, the build-in bean for Principal should likely belong in Jakarta Security, etc.

Though the conversation scope is technically not bound to Faces, maybe we should consider moving it to Faces anyway?

Thoughts?

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms