Hi,
so far, we've been running with the "Build Compatible Extensions" name for the new extension API, and I've personally never been exactly happy about it. For one, it's long -- I'd like to have a single word to explain the nature of these extensions. For two, it doesn't really describe the nature of the new extensions, it just describes the main architectural constraint.
In my opinion, the name should describe that these extensions may be executed without having a running CDI container, so they can't interact with the container and with the application willy nilly, just in a very restricted way. Or that they can even be executed in a separate JVM during application build. I'd like to have these qualities embedded in the API name.
I've got two suggestions myself:
- containerless extensions
- static extensions
I realize these are not terribly better than "build compatible extensions", plus "containerless" is quite a mouthful, while "static" is perhaps too metaphorical. So I'd be fine with using "build compatible" in the end.
I just wanted to see if someone perhaps has a better name up their sleeves.
Bikeshedding mode on!
Thanks,
LT
