I just explained that one minute ago. De-Facto the EE4J PMC has no other choice, as no other organization right now and in near future is able or legally allowed to *standardize* (= provide an official norm) anything in the Java universe due to Oracles trademark rights. Yes, the PMC can say "EE4J is a standard" but this is not an *official* Java standard then; it would simply be an Eclipse product, not more. Neither can the PMC do anything against it if the JCP EC decides to say "EE4J is hereby officially standardized as Java EE 9".
From: ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Little
Sent: Freitag, 1. Dezember 2017 11:48
To: EE4J community discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] JCP and existing specs
It hasnât been declared as far as I can recall and Iâm on the EE4J PMC :)
Where has this been declared? It certainly is not defined in the https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j/charter, and frankly flies in the face of moving things to Eclipse.
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Leo, this is not true. The EE4J PMC multiply explained that future versions of existing specs will be developed at the Eclipse Foundation, but *will* be standardized still through the JCP.
"Does it mean existing specs will need to be continued on the JCP after the Eclipse donation?"
My understanding is that this means that there might be Maintenance Releases of these JSRs fixing bugs or updating the JCP version, for example.
New versions of the Java EE / EE4J Specs would *not* be done thru the JCP.
ee4j-community mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
Registered Address: Red Hat Ltd, 6700 Cork Airport Business Park, Kinsale Road, Co. Cork.
Registered in the Companies Registration Office, Parnell House, 14 Parnell Square, Dublin 1, Ireland, No.304873
Directors:Michael Cunningham (USA), Vicky Wiseman (USA), Michael O'Neill, Keith Phelan, Matt Parson (USA)