| Re: [ee4j-community] Process Question |
Send ee4j-community mailing list submissions to
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
ee4j-community-owner@eclipse.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ee4j-community digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Eclipse Jetty and EE4J (Greg Wilkins)
2. Re: ee4j-community Digest, Vol 2, Issue 83 (Werner Keil)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:23:40 +1100
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ee4j-community] Eclipse Jetty and EE4J
Message-ID:
<CAAPGdfHj6c+AZExHH3idt2051NFuuONoD4078q+ >nQ37f12-Jrg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
The Eclipse Jetty team would like to extend a welcome to the EE4J project
and the new contributors it will bring to the eclipse foundation. Eclipse
has been a good home for the Jetty project and has struct a good balance
between the sometimes competing concerns of guidance, structure, support,
autonomy and flexibility.
We are please to see an opening up of the specification processes and TCKs
and we very much wish to play a part in the ongoing development/innovation
of the Servlet specification and it interplay with the other key components
within the EE space.
Our belief is that EE needs to develop into a more component oriented
architecture where individual technologies can be more stand alone and/or
plug/play rather than be built only as part of monolithic whole. The
Jetty project already uses/provides components from/to other contributors
to the EE ecosystem and we would like to see a spec and test environment
develop that would facilitate further such collaboration, so we can all
concentrate of improving and innovating within our core features.
We look forward to see how the governance within and between the EE
specifications is developed and hope to play a part in both the formulation
of that and the execution.
regards
--
Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx> CTO http://webtide.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171013/653e1b23/attachment. html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:52:57 +0200
From: Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx>
To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] ee4j-community Digest, Vol 2, Issue 83
Message-ID:
<CAAGawe0RNWVt1-5pPjUiDVw0p2FE_ >jmEyWAkWKJpwoAgY-aHDQ@mail. gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Ryan,
There was no evidence, there will be any Java EE 9 led by Oracle.
We have to wait till the minutes from the EC F2F are published, because it
was also discussed there, but maybe some JavaOne sessions equally brushed
it. I was not in so many of them other than about JSR 375 this time, but
others could tell.
The fuzz about Project Fn with some former Java EE Spec Leads heavily
involved does not sound like Java EE "containers" are of much interest to
Oracle now. How this will affect key products like WebLogic one can only
speculate, but it might well be along the lines of how Microsoft tries to
move more and more of its customers from traditional Office products to
Cloud based Office 365.
As a bizarre irony, like Docker itself the foundation of Project Fn is
Google's Go language (if it were not Open Source, I'd be curious to see
another lawsuit, but maybe the Android vs. Java lawsuit is going to be
settled) and there are only API bindings for Java or other languages.
I doubt we'll see Java EE 9, not under that name and not by Oracle.
Werner
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:09 AM, <ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org > wrote:
> Send ee4j-community mailing list submissions to
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ee4j-community-owner@eclipse.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of ee4j-community digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Process Question (Ryan Cuprak)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 19:09:35 -0400
> From: Ryan Cuprak <rcuprak@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Process Question
> Message-ID: <5679CD65-9777-46DE-8E08-32517BB7CE99@xxxxxxxxx >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Thanks for the replies - they were very helpful.
>
> What type of process changes are being envisioned for EE4J? Is the JCP
> being used as the template for creating the new process or is some other
> model being considered?
>
> I understand that EE4J will be separate from the JCP, my question about
> the JCP was more aimed at whether that process will be adopted and than
> modified. If you were with an organization that signed off on JCP
> participation (full member), would you have to go back through your legal
> department to participate in the EE4J? If I understand it correctly, the
> JCP member ship levels (Full Member vs. Observer) are driven at least
> partly by IP concerns.
>
> Regarding licensing/certification, in my opinion it will be critical to
> ensure that EE implementations be compliant so there isn?t confusion. We
> also don?t want to have the specification ?fork? in the future.
>
> I really hope that Java EE 9 gets under way while EE4J is getting
> organized. At JavaOne 2016 a preliminary roadmap for EE 9 was announced - a
> year later I didn?t hear anything about those proposals (hopefully I missed
> to).
>
> -Ryan
>
> > On Oct 12, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > One clarification, Martijn on Question 5... Otherwise, good responses
> to Ryan's questions. Thanks.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > Kevin Sutter
> > STSM, MicroProfile and Java EE architect
> > e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> Twitter:
> @kwsutter
> > phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
> > LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter <
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter >
> >
> > ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <mailto:ee4j-community-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 10/12/2017 02:58:22 PM:
> >
> > > From: Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:
> martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx>>
> > > To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > > Date: 10/12/2017 02:58 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Process Question
> > > Sent by: ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <mailto:ee4j-community-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Hi Ryan,
> > >
> > > As Mike previously mentioned a lot of this has to be worked out.
> > > I'm hoping the project charter will be approved on the 23rd of Oct
> > > which will then allow the PMC to be formed and so on...
> > >
> > > That said I'll take a stab at some of the likely directions.
> > >
> > > On 12 October 2017 at 20:08, Ryan Cuprak <rcuprak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > I have a couple of questions regarding the path forward with Java EE:
> > > 1. Are implementations going to ?license? the name in some legally
> > > binding way?
> > >
> > > I really don't know yet, but I'm sensing that most folks want some
> > > sort of certification / compliance pass mark. Whether that's a
> > > legally binding license I think is up to the community to decide.
> > >
> > > 2. Are there going to be requirements on licenses, such as an
> > > implementation has to support version X for Y number of years and
> > > release a new version within a specific period of time?
> > >
> > > Same as above.
> > >
> > > 3. How will enforcement of compliance be done?
> > >
> > > If compliance is mandated, then a TCK like mechanism would seem to
> > > be the common approach here (again, only if this what the community
> wants it)
> > >
> > > 4. What were Sun/Oracle?s license requirements? Is that public by
> chance?
> > >
> > > Mike covered that I think.
> > >
> > > 5. Is the JCP process being totally tossed?
> > >
> > > I'd say yes. Oracle doesn't want EE4J governed in the JCP and
> > > frankly nor do any of the vendors and nor do a good chunk of the
> > > users (I appreciate there are more than just 1 who would like it to
> > > stay there). Again I feel that way not because Oracle was evil or
> > > terrible, but the fact remains that the JCP is not an independent
> > > body, and so I think something new is required.
> >
> > The JCP and JCP process are not going away or being disbanded. They
> will still exist and function in the same capacity as they do today. There
> are Java SE and even Java EE JSRs (Configuration JSR, for example) that are
> still using the JCP processes.
> >
> > The question is whether EE4J will us the JCP process. In that regard,
> then I would tend to agree with Martijn's answer. The current thinking is
> that some other yet-to-be-determined process will be used for ratifying
> EE4J specifications.
> >
> > >
> > > 6. Are the spec leads for EE 8 going to lead the specs for EE4J?
> > >
> > > Up to the community to decide but I think you've already seen RedHat
> > > and IBM offer to take lead on several JSRs and Oracle (not binding
> > > them to anything here) also indicated that they would take
> > > leadership for other specs if asked to do so.
> > >
> > > 5. Will work continue in the JCP on EE 9 while EE4J gets going or
> > > is everything grinding to a halt?
> > >
> > > I think that will stop, would need an Oracle answer on that one though.
> > >
> > > My thoughts, I?ve been trying to educate JUG members and my employer
> > > on the JCP. If someone had a complaint or suggestion I would tell
> > > them to submit feedback to the relevant spec. Should JUGs continue
> > > to pursue adopt-a-jsr? I would rather see a gradual evolution than a
> > > revamp of the process.
> > >
> > > I'll be encouraging all Adopt a JSR folks to simply move to the EE4J
> > > community and engage in a traditional open source project manner.
> > > The final barriers have effectively been removed, so there won't be
> > > a need for a separate programme, just that folks contribute at Eclipse
> :-).
> > >
> > > Regarding the charter, instead of a ?nimble? process, I would rather
> > > see goals - one release a year with a point release or consistent
> > > and predictable updates etc.. I wouldn?t start out a charter by
> > > pointing out flaws but that is just my opinion.
> > >
> > > That's good feedback, I think another version of the charter is
> > > coming out in the next few days, so *please* do comment on that
> > > aspect again there.
> > >
> > > BTW: I did see the blog entry "On Naming, or Why EE4J Does Not Suck?
> > > but I have to comment that as a JUG leader, the EE4J name definitely
> > > stirred passions. The last time I received negative feedback was
> > > when Oracle bought Sun. I received text messages and emails
> > > complaining before I saw the announcement.
> > >
> > > Naming is hard, naming by committee is impossible. That said EE4J
> > > is the Eclipse Project name and will not be the actual branding /
> > > certification name, which is something the community can come up
> > > with (after much bikeshedding one suspects ;p).
> > >
> > > Thanks Ryan they were thought provoking Q's!
> > >
> > >
> > > -Ryan
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url ? <https://urldefense.
> proofpoint.com/v2/url?>
> > > u=https-3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_listinfo_ee4j-
> 2Dcommunity&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> > > siA1ZOg&r=R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m=
> HubZd9CtjAjGXMjxqtcPpp4VFtYE08eif4GCAJdFlfQ&s=3iVN-
> > > u4RRo1Zl-pHVVyWaVQdFbI-hba2afGynZ5hs6s&e=
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ee4j-community mailing list
> > ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- <community
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- >community
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- community/attachments/
> 20171012/ee7085ba/attachment.html>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 833 bytes
> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
> URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- community/attachments/
> 20171012/ee7085ba/attachment.sig>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> End of ee4j-community Digest, Vol 2, Issue 83
> *********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171013/1903bec4/attachment. html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
End of ee4j-community Digest, Vol 2, Issue 84
*********************************************