Major Using Seam's CDI XML extension for CDI and Candi XML as a guide, let's add the ability to do XML config back into the specification.
Annotations and Alternatives should always be the first line of offense for doing injection, decoration and interception. However, there are times when you want to configure things that don't fit well into this model. This is also useful for testing.
This is not to give up type safeness via annotations, but to have some additional flexibility.
[CDI-123] Using Seam XML extension for CDI and Candi XML as a guide, let's add the ability to do XML config back into the specification
Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - Discussed in EG meeting, there is not really consensus in the community about the right way to resolve this, and we're running out of time to add new large features to CDI 1.1
Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - Discussed in EG meeting, there is not really consensus in the community about the right way to resolve this, and we're running out of time to add new large features to CDI 1.1 
Mark Struberg (Inactive)
added a comment - What's the status? I'm tempted to set this to "won't fix".
I've now used CDI in lots of real world projects and customers for more than 2 years and I know no single user who actually used it at the end of the day.
There were 2 customers who moved from Spring to CDI and originally intended to use it. But both ended up either using the Spring-CDI bridge or migrating parts to native annotation based CDI because re-doing all the configuration as CDI-xml was way too much work. Much more than just moving the Services to plain CDI.
Mark Struberg (Inactive)
added a comment - What's the status? I'm tempted to set this to "won't fix".
I've now used CDI in lots of real world projects and customers for more than 2 years and I know no single user who actually used it at the end of the day.
There were 2 customers who moved from Spring to CDI and originally intended to use it. But both ended up either using the Spring-CDI bridge or migrating parts to native annotation based CDI because re-doing all the configuration as CDI-xml was way too much work. Much more than just moving the Services to plain CDI. Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - George suggest you create a JIRA for this so we don't loose the idea.
Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - George suggest you create a JIRA for this so we don't loose the idea. 
George Gastaldi
added a comment - IMHO, this feature should remain as an Extension as it is done with Seam XML module.
We could, however, provide a fluent configuration API so that the CDI module configuration would not rely solely on XML and annotations.
George Gastaldi
added a comment - IMHO, this feature should remain as an Extension as it is done with Seam XML module.
We could, however, provide a fluent configuration API so that the CDI module configuration would not rely solely on XML and annotations. Mark Struberg (Inactive)
added a comment - Actually this has been in the spec originally and got dropped later.
There are multiple reasons for dropping it:
a) it would bloat the spec (would take at least 10 pages to define all that stuff unambiguous)
b) back then there was a BIG discussion about the style. Some wanted it 'modern', others wanted it EJB like.
c) Seam XML or any other configuration Extension is portable anyway.
d) In a Cluster/Cloud environment, you maybe like to configure your beans via the Database? So we could not satisfy all the needs anyway.
Mark Struberg (Inactive)
added a comment - Actually this has been in the spec originally and got dropped later.
There are multiple reasons for dropping it:
a) it would bloat the spec (would take at least 10 pages to define all that stuff unambiguous)
b) back then there was a BIG discussion about the style. Some wanted it 'modern', others wanted it EJB like.
c) Seam XML or any other configuration Extension is portable anyway.
d) In a Cluster/Cloud environment, you maybe like to configure your beans via the Database? So we could not satisfy all the needs anyway. Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - This is a large feature and requires alignment with the entire Java EE platform. I will check and see whether it is possible in the CDI 1.1 timeframe but for now placing it as TBD.
Pete Muir (Inactive)
added a comment - This is a large feature and requires alignment with the entire Java EE platform. I will check and see whether it is possible in the CDI 1.1 timeframe but for now placing it as TBD. 
The CDI project is part ofJakarta and uses GitHub issues as it's issue tracking system.
Therefore, all issues in CDI JIRA project are being bulk-closed as described in this GitHub issue.
If you feel like this particular issue deserves ongoing discussion, investigation or fixes in CDI/CDI TCK, please create a new issue under GitHub repository and include a link to this JIRA.
For specification related question/issues, please use - https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/cdi/issues
For CDI TCK related questions/issues, please use - https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/cdi-tck/issues