Even comments don’t work btw, but I mentioned what I absolutely don’t like About D because it would destroy Things that were carefully declared and defined. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 In going through Kevin's options I realized they are not as separate as I first thought, so I have reworded them into options A-D in the following doc for comment. Feel free to edit it directly. It seems fine to leave that out for now, we agreed that Implicit automatic module names (no descriptor) are ok for this release, but where automatic-module-name or a full module-info was already declared, they should be in the correct namespace, e.g. "jakarta.servlet" instead of "java.servlet". Plus it’s an absolute no-go IMO to call it "jakarta.servlet" now and suddenly switch to "jakarta.servlet.api" in the next release. If a component really had ".api" then it should stick to it while it’s part of the platform. JSP only added this recently, there was no automatic-module-name in Java EE 8 and it seems not before 3.x yet either. Looks like Mark Thomas added it just 3 weeks ago, probably not coordinated with other specs like Servlet. Werner When using modules I agree, but I don't see that we are willing to spend the time to come up with the final name that will be needed when JPMS is actually supported. Personally, I believe it does matter as you do not want to keep changing the module names especially if you are adding the Automatic-Module-Name Manifest Attribute. For the 9.0 release, I guess it does not matter too much, but the discussion around the name is going to get more involved I suspect, and expand beyond the scope of just an artifact name based module name. For example, to simplify the end user's life, I can see having one or more aggregate modules using the spec base (jakarta.servlet) that define the various import/export/services relationships for a typical servlet app, JSP app, JSF app, etc. With that structure I would expect that we do want .api modules for every spec. Thanks for the input!
We'll have to leave this thread open for a bit to see if we are opening a can of worms or not... ;-)
Mark, thanks for volunteering to minimally change "java.servlet" to "jakarta.servlet". If we get additional volunteering along these lines, then we could contain this minimal update for Jakarta EE 9 (authentication, authorization, servlet, and transactions).
Let's see how this discussion plays out (and get input from the Spec Committee) as to what's containable for Jakarta EE 9, or 9.1, or 10. Thanks!
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev |
