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
