Where we already have separate projects for the specifications (APIs) and the implementation, they'll remain separate at the Eclipse Foundation. For example, "Eclipse WebSocket API for Java" is the API specification project and "Eclipse Tyrus" is the implementation project.
In some cases, such as Eclipse JSON Processing, the existing project contains both the API classes and the implementation classes. After the initial project is established at Eclipse, the EE4J community can choose to do the work to split that project into two projects if desired.
We've decided to rename the specification projects from (e.g.) "Eclipse RESTful Web Services API for Java" to "Eclipse Project for JAX-RS". That should make it clear what the intent of the project is, while conforming to Oracle trademark guidelines.
Yes, the JAX-RS JSR reference is wrong; we'll fix that.
Sebastian Daschner wrote on 11/21/17 10:51 AM:
Hi there,
It's great to see some progress. However, there are a few things in that announcement that puzzle me. Apologies upfront for any stupid questions, I'm just trying to make sense out of it.
First of all, these project proposals seem to throw both specifications and RIs into one pot. I guess it makes sense to create Eclipse projects for implementations such as Tyrus or Jersey. Are the specifications also planned to be incorporated as Eclipse projects? Or will there be standardization processes, what the JSRs with EGs are today? Especially in regard to the overall platform, which JSR 366 is today. I'm not familiar with what is planned to be the substitute for JSRs & EGs, but maybe it makes sense for the Java EE community to see some suggestion there first.
Do the specifications need to adopt the name Eclipse? In the EE4J FAQ #7 it says that the intention is to continue to use the former JCP specification names, such as 'Java API for RESTful Web Services'. I know that names are what people get religious about, but still I believe that we should not choose some names for specifications before the name for what will succeed Java EE (e.g. Open EE) is carved into stone. IMO 'Eclipse RESTful Web Services API for Java' is a bad substitute for JAX-RS.
I only checked the Eclipse analog for the JAX-RS so far, but that refers to JSR 339, which is JAX-RS 2.0, not JSR 370. Since EE4J should be aligned with EE 8, shouldn't that refer to the current specification?
Cheers,
Sebastian
(JSR 370, 374, 382)
On 11/21/2017 05:33 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
All,
I would like to draw your attention to fact that nine new EE4J project proposals were recently posted on the Eclipse Foundation's proposal page. This is the first step to making the migration of Java EE to the Eclipse Foundation a reality.
The list of proposals is below. There are more details on the proposal page, or on my blog post.
Thanks!
Eclipse Tyrus
Eclipse OpenMQ
Eclipse Grizzly
Eclipse Jersey
Eclipse RESTful Web Services API for Java
Eclipse Message Service API for Java
Eclipse WebSocket API for Java
Eclipse Mojarra
Eclipse JSON Processing
_______________________________________________
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
