This doesn't necessarily have to be correct, I'm not particularly sure about the dependency on EL API. Feel free to disregard, this is just my naive attempt :-)

This doesn't necessarily have to be correct, I'm not particularly sure about the dependency on EL API. Feel free to disregard, this is just my naive attempt :-)

That's probably fine but we cannot really use cdi 5.0 snapshot unless we also change the CI to build the snapshot in order to retain coverage.
Or, we'd have to have some Alpha CDI release which is definitely an option and also very simple to do.

Oh, and we need to bump the project version for the new CDI version (weld 6 is CDI 4.1)

@Ladicek actually, I am not sure what's the point of the EL dependency. Did you have a specific reason to add it?
I don't think we need it.

As for the project version, I have sent #229

It can probably be done differently, but I remember I had to change a couple of places to use the ELAwareBeanManager, and they refer to the EL types.

It can probably be done differently, but I remember I had to change a couple of places to use the ELAwareBeanManager, and they refer to the EL types.

Right, but the core repo already declares a dependency on the EL API (if I remember correctly) and you did not remove it there which puzzled me.
I'll take a closer look at the setup...

It can probably be done differently, but I remember I had to change a couple of places to use the ELAwareBeanManager, and they refer to the EL types.

Right, but the core repo already declares a dependency on the EL API (if I remember correctly) and you did not remove it there which puzzled me. I'll take a closer look at the setup...

I took a closer look and ATM we are even excluding the EL dependency coming from jakarta.enterprise.cdi-el-api.
I don't claim to remember why, but I assume to avoid bringing EL dep into environments where it has no real value? Then again, Weld Core is going to pull in it anyway 🤷

So we could either:

• Remove the exclusion and just consume the version provided by CDI EL artifact.
• Keep the API clean of this dep and have the declaration in Weld - which is the current state.

I have no strong opinion but I'd probably stick with the latter.
I'll adjust the PR accordingly once we have a CDI API to update here as well.

Whatever suits you best! I'll close this PR to avoid any possible confusion.