[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Glassfish 5.0 compatibility
|
I would say your assessment is entirely accurate. The concerns really speak to the continued strength of the Java and Java EE names. It would be very well received by the community if Oracle decided to make some further concessions on this subject. In particular I wonder if they can allow limited permission to just use the javax.enterprise sub-package for future specifications that come out of this effort?
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/3/17 8:36 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Glassfish 5.0 compatibility
It's clear from various chats at JavaOne that package names are an area of concern for the Java EE community as it moves into the Eclipse Foundation.
There is a *strong* desire to keep javax even for new specifications, but there are challenges with that approach.
The secondary "vote", if you will, is to not use org.eclipse as the top-level domain, with it getting lost in the vastness of the namespace. The most pragmatic example I heard is that some customer/user organizations limit their use of namespaces for enterprise development, and org.eclipse is too broad (and org.eclipse .ee4j, for example, isn't a solution). A top-level domain of ee4j.* could be a potential compromise.
I am not advocating any position here, just trying to gather data points and convey them here.