Re: [ee4j-community] Tomitribe commitment to EE4J

[David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 14, 2017, at 11:24 AM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The specification is a step forward, but does fall into the same trap that Java EE security has always "solved" the via Java layer abstractions and doesn't address wire level interoperability.

I'm not so sure if it really fell onto a trap of any kind.

There were simply many issues to be addressed and only so much time and resources available. The artefacts that were specified were basically the low hanging fruit and addressed basic gaps in the existing specs.

Fully understood.  I know Jean-Louis on our side was hoping to participate more, but time did not allow.  He is a JWT enthusiast as well and that would have helped on the resources side.

I definitely agree that what was accomplished is a step forward.

-David