-
Another one for you 😉 but a really puzzling one: Can you think of any reason why this (in a @Inject
Instance<JpaRepository<? extends BaseEntity<?>, ?>> allRepositores; provides all I ruled out any local inconsistencies and it only goes away when changing it to: @Inject
Instance<JpaRepository<?, ?>> allRepositores; PS: Doesn't make any sense, or does it? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 4 comments 14 replies
-
That looks like a spicy issue indeed @famod :)
Do I understand it correctly that those beans are actually existing and can be selected/injected on your local machine if you change the Another thing I can think of (probably not the case, but just to be sure) is removed beans - can you verify that on your local machine those beans do not get marked as removable? Alternatively, just mark all of the impls as |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
CC @geoand |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Very weird issue... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
That looks like a spicy issue indeed @famod :)
Do I understand it correctly that those beans are actually existing and can be selected/injected on your local machine if you change the
Instance
declaration?If so, then that rules out any issues with bean discovery/registration.
Another thing I can think of (probably not the case, but just to be sure) is removed beans - can you verify that on your local machine those beans do not get marked as removable? Alternatively, just mark all of the impls as
@Unremovable
and try with the originalInstance<JpaRepository<? extends BaseEntity<?>, ?>>
to see what happens.