[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [ee4j-community] Glassfish 5.0 compatibility
|
For whatever the reasons, the EE4J name really has not been that warmly received by the community. What I suggest here is coming up with a few options (including for packaging if javax is really categorically out of the question) and let the community vote on it. I know it's a lot more effort, but it may be worth it in the long run given how large, vocal and active the Java EE community is.
By the community voting on it, I don't mean just discussions on this list. Although people care a lot about Java EE, the reality is that only the most committed folks would likely directly contribute here.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Ondrej Mihályi <ondrej.mihalyi@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/3/17 9:02 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Glassfish 5.0 compatibility
I agree that preserving the javax prefix even for new APIs is the most preferred option to maintain consistency and secure success of the whole platform after migration to the Eclipse foundation.
If that's not possible due to legal concerns, John's suggestion of using a new top level prefix sounds well to me. Except I would prefer some other prefix than ee4j. - maybe something like jx. or eej. To be honest, ee4j sounds like a joke to developers, more like a business acronym we all look at with despect. It's perfectly fine to use the name as a top level Eclipse project, but I would avoid using it in real API.
A compromise solution would be to allocate a fixed namespace with the javax. prefix, for example
javax.ee.
I would appreciate seeking Oracle's and lawyers' opinion on these package namespaces for new specs:
- using javax.
- using javax.<fixednamespace>, e.g.
javax.ee.
- using a new top-level prefix, such as eej. or ee.
I hope that Eclipse would be OK with such namespaces for API. Of course, non-API packages are a different thing and I'm perfectly OK to rename packages like org.glassfish to org.eclipse.glassfish unless it breaks some contracts.
Ondro
