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
