Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cn4j-alliance] MP apis and "graduation" to Jakarta EE

Just for completeness, I believe what is today REST client and Open API had also been discussed in the former JAX-RS expert group. That's no surprise as these features are so close to the REST domain.

I do agree that Emily's proposal does solve some thorny issues by moving things from one working group to another as things mature, namely keeping dependencies flowing in one (IMHO logical) direction, making it a tad easier to understand the guarantees/focus a given working group has and making Jakarta EE specific integrations a lot easier.

Reza Rahman
Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Blogger, Speaker

Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 1/19/21 4:42 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Discussions on formation of a CN4J Alliance with the MicroProfile Working Group <cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cn4j-alliance] MP apis and "graduation" to Jakarta EE

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 9:49 PM Emily Jiang <emijiang6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I meant that they were originally planned to be done for Java EE 8, via the JCP. So there was nothing to transition ;)


It's a past statement. I don't think there is much value to discuss what might have been included in Java EE 8.

Yes, and no. Yes, of course it's a past statement, but it does show that if these specs were planned to be in Java EE 8, they are a natural fit for Jakarta. It's not some wish that came around later.

Config, Health, Metrics, Fault Tolerance and JWT among others were all planned for Jakarta EE. 

The first 4 were not done since at the time the issues at Oracle started, and essentially MicroProfile was created as an alternative. JWT was not included since I simply ran out of time for Security 1.0 (both OAuth and JWT were planned for 1.0). Then the entire transition to Eclipse happened, and in the meanwhile MP "hijacked" JWT (hijacked with a big ;)).

So it's no use to cry about spilled milk; what's done is done, but to reiterate, it's an explanation why Jakarta EE has a need/desire for those things.
 
I think moving MP Config to Jakarta while retaining the same namespace is a better option.

That would be my second choice, not so pretty, but I could live with it.

Kind regards,
Arjan


 

Thanks
Emily



On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:21 PM arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:43 PM Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, many and APIs were not intended to ever transition to the JCP. 

I meant that they were originally planned to be done for Java EE 8, via the JCP. So there was nothing to transition ;)

Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms

 
_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance


--
Thanks
Emily

_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance

Back to the top