Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] EE4J and the JCP

Hi,

As I said on Markus thread, my concern is that we might not be moving Java EE to a different place, but discontinuing Java EE and creating a new project based on it. On that matter, we'll need clarification from Oracle and the participating vendors: are you really open sourcing what's already there, or are you making Java slimmer by moving away everything but the standard edition? In the second case (which I hope is not the case), I'd sadly understand that a common standards body wouldn't make sense.

The JCP process has been blamed for being too slow, but how will it allow Java SE to release a new version every 6 months? Surely that will need some changes on the JCP. Could those changes also help us? Should we participate on those discussions asking for our needs?

In my opinion it's still too early to abandon the JCP. We should see before if it can still be changed to take everyone's concerns into account (Java SE, Java ME and Java EE) and in case it's too difficult, I'm with you and Markus, we should create a common replacement.

PS: could you please point me to some link on the Java ME movement you mention? I haven't found any information about it.


Regards,

Guillermo González de Agüero

El lun., 9 oct. 2017 a las 4:19, Michael Nascimento (<misterm@xxxxxxxxx>) escribió:
Consolidating my thoughts here with the correct thread name:

My main concern is that, while we might be doing something better suited for the Java EE community, we're scattering the Java community even more. OpenJDK has its own contribution agreements, rules and process; we're about to create something different here; everything else left in the JCP will follow the current process; apparently Java ME wants to do something similar to EE. So this new reality will mean one's contributions to one part of Java means nothing when they contribute to the rest, there'll be a lot to learn process-wise, paperwork to be filled... We're actually making it harder for people to contribute to Java *in general*.

While I understand OpenJDK is kind of a "sideways" situation, I'd like to propose we pursue something here in terms of specification process that can be used for all Java specifications in the future that find the JCP too heavyweight and problematic, so that we don't have one solution for every facet of Java. Something like "Open Standards for Java". If key players as IBM, Red Hat, Tomitribe et al and some communities, as the LJC, conclude the JCP is not the way to do things going forward, I'm making a plea for JCP.next to be established here - and not just EE4J spec process; otherwise, we're fragmenting the community even more and making contributions to Java, as a whole, even more painful.

To Mike Milinkovich, following up the question I've made: if the Eclipse Foundation is the one submitting the JSRs, wouldn't all IP from the specs belong to the Foundation? Wouldn't it be open and egalitarian?

Regards,
Michael
_______________________________________________
ee4j-community mailing list
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community

Back to the top