| Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects |
Werner
Send ee4j-community mailing list submissions to
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
ee4j-community-owner@eclipse.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ee4j-community digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects (Ryan Cuprak)
2. Re: Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects (Saeed)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 17:34:21 -0500
From: Ryan Cuprak <rcuprak@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
Message-ID: <2261789F-CDD7-4D16-A242-3396A8D7439C@xxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
You are definitely right that it is strongly associated with application servers and probably monolithic applications at large companies (where you have company tooling standards etc.).
However, part of the perception of Java EE is probably generational. Someone who has a negative opinion of Java EE was probably using it 10+ years ago when Spring came along. My impression is that younger generations lack the J2EE biases, are ambivalent about Java EE, and lean towards Node.js/_javascript_. The older generation thinks an app container is heavy weight and prefer Tomcat whereas newer developers (last ten years) would skip Java altogether and go with Node.
I am concerned about loosing the Java EE brand recognition. My impressions (and from emails I received), Eclipse does have a negative reputation owing to the Eclipse IDE - even outside of the Java community.
I?d like to see someone with marketing experience involved with naming/branding. The EE4J community is a self-selected group which may not be representative of the larger community and specifically decision makers (like CIOs and middle managers).
I vote for keeping javax or something like javaee for the package names. A split personality in the platform sends the wrong message.
-Ryan
> On Nov 13, 2017, at 3:01 PM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:martijnverburg@gmail.com >> wrote:
> I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that sadly the Java EE brand is seen as a negative thing.
>
> Well, yes and no.
>
> As I mentioned earlier, Java EE is for some strongly associated with the concept of application servers, and application servers on their turn are for a subset of those associated with specifically WebSphere 6, which on its turn is associated with keeping developers constrained (unable to make any choices, just deliver code as wars or ears). Whether any of this is actually true or logical in practice barely matters, as people seem to have this perception, which is what matters most.
>
> Obviously though, there are communities of both competing products and actual competitors that very likely have an interest in keeping this negativity alive. What's to say any new name would not be targeted right away with the same kind of negative press?
>
> Additionally, Java EE *is* a well known brand, people have heard about it, thousands of articles exists about it, hundreds of books, etc etc. Companies do know it, and do ask for it.
>
> If/when a new name is chosen we shouldn't forget having to guard in some way against new negativity and to make the name as well known as Java EE was.
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Unfortunately we were never able to shake off the dire reputation of J2EE, despite the vast improvements to the platform.
>
> I think a clean break is actually a *good* thing.
>
> Cheers,
> Martijn
>
> On 12 November 2017 at 18:05, reza_rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> I am very glad someone like yourself from the vendor/EC side see this as an issue and is willing to publicly identify this as an issue.
>
> This is by far one of the biggest issues we have identified so far in the Java EE Guardians community. As an initial step, we have asked the community to send Oracle and other key EE4J stakeholders direct and personal feedback on this: https://form.jotform.com/72648425384161 <https://form.jotform.com/72648425384161 >. I suspect it is the sole matter with regards to EE4J that these folks have been reached out to about the most.
>
> Unfortunately clearly the community has still not really been heard on this matter. While I am sure the root cause of this issue is Oracle's legal and branding departments being overly rigid, this is something that Oracle executives can intervene on if they deemed it worthy of solving.
>
> From the Java EE Guardians community, our likely next steps are to arrive at a joint open letter asking EE4J stakeholders to address this issue - Oracle being the main party of our request. Any support you can lend us in this regard, even if only moral, would be helpful and highly appreciated.
>
> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Greg Luck <gluck@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gluck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> Date: 11/3/17 2:07 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> Subject: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
>
> Hi
>
> Had a call with Mike today about moving JCache across to EE4J.
>
> We have JCache 1.1 in the JCP review process now and it should be out in a few weeks? time. So we could consider moving after that point.
>
> The biggest issue to me is that, at least currently, any new APIs will not be allowed to use javax. Today we use javax.cache. This would mean that JCache 2 would need to change its package name. We have 13 implementations out there and a huge amount of user code that uses javax.cache. This would be an extremely disruptive change.
>
> In our case Oracle is a copyright owner along with myself for the spec. As an owner, Oracle if they wished, should be able to allow JCache 2 to continue to use the javax.cache package even though the process has changed from JCP to the yet unnamed and to be formed Eclipse Community Process.
>
> Interested in anyone?s thoughts on this.
>
> Regards
>
> Greg Luck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- <https://dev.eclipse.org/community mailman/listinfo/ee4j- >community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- <https://dev.eclipse.org/community mailman/listinfo/ee4j- >community
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- <https://dev.eclipse.org/community mailman/listinfo/ee4j- >community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171113/09199264/attachment. html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171113/09199264/attachment. sig
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:41:02 +0000
From: Saeed <sinaisix@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
Message-ID:
<CAGqFYquyK9g8M3KYjoG9ohrEdJDPM SWPh3U2KHHyJP=wtreo9w@mail. gmail.com >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I think I agree with the assertion
My impression is that younger generations lack the J2EE biases, are
> ambivalent about Java EE, and lean towards Node.js/_javascript_. The older
> generation thinks an app container is heavy weight and prefer Tomcat
> whereas newer developers (last ten years) would skip Java altogether and go
> with Node.
I am a young developer and the only one using Java EE among my
contemporaries in my circles. I am essentially the dinosaur of the group.
It's mostly Node/Ruby all the way.
Somehow Java EE has failed to shake off the dark days of yesteryears that
is something that I believe should be taken into serious consideration with
regards to rebranding and/or moving away from the name Java EE.
Luqman
Java EE Instructor
Pedantic Academy
http://pedanticacademy.com <https://pedanticacademy.com>
Solutions Architect
Pedantic Devs
https://pedanticdevs.com
+1-330-5161942
On 13 November 2017 at 22:34, Ryan Cuprak <rcuprak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> You are definitely right that it is strongly associated with application
> servers and probably monolithic applications at large companies (where you
> have company tooling standards etc.).
>
> However, part of the perception of Java EE is probably generational.
> Someone who has a negative opinion of Java EE was probably using it 10+
> years ago when Spring came along. My impression is that younger generations
> lack the J2EE biases, are ambivalent about Java EE, and lean towards
> Node.js/_javascript_. The older generation thinks an app container is heavy
> weight and prefer Tomcat whereas newer developers (last ten years) would
> skip Java altogether and go with Node.
>
> I am concerned about loosing the Java EE brand recognition. My
> impressions (and from emails I received), Eclipse does have a negative
> reputation owing to the Eclipse IDE - even outside of the Java community.
>
> I?d like to see someone with marketing experience involved with
> naming/branding. The EE4J community is a self-selected group which may not
> be representative of the larger community and specifically decision makers
> (like CIOs and middle managers).
>
> I vote for keeping javax or something like javaee for the package names.
> A split personality in the platform sends the wrong message.
>
> -Ryan
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2017, at 3:01 PM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@gmail.
> com> wrote:
>
>> I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that sadly the Java EE
>> brand is seen as a negative thing.
>>
>
> Well, yes and no.
>
> As I mentioned earlier, Java EE is for some strongly associated with the
> concept of application servers, and application servers on their turn are
> for a subset of those associated with specifically WebSphere 6, which on
> its turn is associated with keeping developers constrained (unable to make
> any choices, just deliver code as wars or ears). Whether any of this is
> actually true or logical in practice barely matters, as people seem to have
> this perception, which is what matters most.
>
> Obviously though, there are communities of both competing products and
> actual competitors that very likely have an interest in keeping this
> negativity alive. What's to say any new name would not be targeted right
> away with the same kind of negative press?
>
> Additionally, Java EE *is* a well known brand, people have heard about it,
> thousands of articles exists about it, hundreds of books, etc etc.
> Companies do know it, and do ask for it.
>
> If/when a new name is chosen we shouldn't forget having to guard in some
> way against new negativity and to make the name as well known as Java EE
> was.
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Unfortunately we were never able to shake off the dire reputation of
>> J2EE, despite the vast improvements to the platform.
>>
>> I think a clean break is actually a *good* thing.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martijn
>>
>> On 12 November 2017 at 18:05, reza_rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I am very glad someone like yourself from the vendor/EC side see this as
>>> an issue and is willing to publicly identify this as an issue.
>>>
>>> This is by far one of the biggest issues we have identified so far in
>>> the Java EE Guardians community. As an initial step, we have asked the
>>> community to send Oracle and other key EE4J stakeholders direct and
>>> personal feedback on this: https://form.jotform.com/72648425384161 . I
>>> suspect it is the sole matter with regards to EE4J that these folks have
>>> been reached out to about the most.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately clearly the community has still not really been heard on
>>> this matter. While I am sure the root cause of this issue is Oracle's legal
>>> and branding departments being overly rigid, this is something that Oracle
>>> executives can intervene on if they deemed it worthy of solving.
>>>
>>> From the Java EE Guardians community, our likely next steps are to
>>> arrive at a joint open letter asking EE4J stakeholders to address this
>>> issue - Oracle being the main party of our request. Any support you can
>>> lend us in this regard, even if only moral, would be helpful and highly
>>> appreciated.
>>>
>>> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>>>
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: Greg Luck <gluck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: 11/3/17 2:07 PM (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Had a call with Mike today about moving JCache across to EE4J.
>>>
>>> We have JCache 1.1 in the JCP review process now and it should be out in
>>> a few weeks? time. So we could consider moving after that point.
>>>
>>> The biggest issue to me is that, at least currently, any new APIs will
>>> not be allowed to use javax. Today we use javax.cache. This would mean that
>>> JCache 2 would need to change its package name. We have 13 implementations
>>> out there and a huge amount of user code that uses javax.cache. This would
>>> be an extremely disruptive change.
>>>
>>> In our case Oracle is a copyright owner along with myself for the spec.
>>> As an owner, Oracle if they wished, should be able to allow JCache 2 to
>>> continue to use the javax.cache package even though the process has changed
>>> from JCP to the yet unnamed and to be formed Eclipse Community Process.
>>>
>>> Interested in anyone?s thoughts on this.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Greg Luck
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171113/71a0c103/attachment. html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
End of ee4j-community Digest, Vol 3, Issue 33
*********************************************