[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [POLL] Would you support the as-is javax JAXB and JAX-WS in your implementation
|
I still think that this is asking the wrong question.
Because our product would want to provide compatibility for Java EE 8
applications, we would have to do (a).
Now find someone who intends to build a product that will never provide
that compatibility and ask them what they'll do. Those are the people
we're targeting with this pruned and streamlined platform definition.
I don't think you would find anyone who would provide JAXB and JAX-WS
but *not* provide binary compatibility with all the other javax APIs
that would be needed by applications that also need JAXB and JAX-WS.
Note also that Activation is a hard dependency of Mail; you can't have
Mail without Activation. Because of that, my proposal is to move
Activation into Jakarta EE 9 and keep it as a full fledged, jakarta-ized
component spec of Jakarta EE.
I think the issue here is really about JAXB and JAX-WS et. al.
David Blevins wrote on 12/3/19 1:59 AM:
> An informal poll for the implementations. I think we might be all saying the same thing differently.
>
> Let's say that Jakarta EE 9 doesn't "include" JAXB, JAX-WS or Activation, whatever "include" means.
>
> Will you then:
>
> a) leave the `javax` versions of JAXB, JAX-WS, Activation in your future Jakarta EE 9 implementation
> b) put the work into removing `javax` versions of JAXB, JAX-WS, Activation and ship your future Jakarta EE 9 implementation without them
>
>