[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] On Naming
|
I'll definitely review the charter and encourage others to do so as soon as possible.
To state the obvious though, it's clear the community sees that as a secondary priority compared to the naming - aka fundamental identity of this technology. I would be disappointed if I really need to explain the distinction to anyone that stands to become the new stewards of the Java EE community.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 9/30/17 7:07 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] On Naming
Will, thanks for working hard on EE4J's behalf to both not break backwards compatability and move forward with javax for *existing* specifications. While continuing to use javax would be awesome, I understand if there are limits to your influence, LOL.
Reza, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the Charter (if you haven't shared them already).