| Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects |
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: Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects (Mark Little)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 09:54:59 +0000
From: Mark Little <mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
Message-ID: <CE6F116B-3909-4BDE-B1A6-51155FDA5790@xxxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
+1
And for the record, rather than try to convince Oracle (legal) to allow javax for net new specifications in EE4J, which several of us have done already, I would much rather we spent our collective time more fruitfully engaged in driving EE4J forward in other areas.
Mark.
> On 13 Nov 2017, at 14:05, Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Getting back to Greg's original post... Since JCache has already been approved by the JCP, then the continued use of javax.cache.* should be allowed within EE4J. It's the "net new" technologies that would be incorporated into EE4J that would require an alternate package name. For example, if a new spec is developed at EE4J -- let's say for NoSQL. Then, that project would not be allowed to use javax.nosql.*. This new project would have to use something like org.ee4j.nosql (or whatever is decided).
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Kevin Sutter
> STSM, MicroProfile and Java EE architect
> e-mail: 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 >
>
>
>
> From: Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero <z06.guillermo@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 11/13/2017 01:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
> Sent by: ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org
>
>
>
> Exactly.
>
> It's fine to abandon the Java EE brand and have a fresh start, but Java EE is not only about EJBs and other "heavyweight" technologies. JSON-B is an EE spec that's clearly useful outside Java EE and I hope Jackson and Gson will implement the spec at some point. I doubt that would happen if the package name would be e.g. "org.ee4j.json.bind". I don't think we would have had such a list of Servlet containers if Servlets had been created from an external entity.
>
> JSON-B, JSON-P, JCache, JAXB (not available in Java 9 by default, needs the "java.se.ee <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http- >" module) are good examples of specs I think are totally useful outside Java EE environments. Sure we can expect these existing specs to retain the javax packages, but what will happen with new specs? Will we still need to use the JCP if we want to promote some spec to still be part of the Java library?3A__java.se.ee&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_ iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r= R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= IsTgAs7QqNr484MafDPam1ZaHxa1Ld kq05ajG1N_TcQ&e=
>
> We already know Oracle's opinion on this, but now that we already have the PMC set up, I'd like to hear other vendors thoughts and how you think this can be tackled.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero
>
> El dom., 12 nov. 2017 a las 22:38, Reza Rahman (<reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx>>) escribi?:
> To be clear, the Java EE Guardians community also believes a clean break from the Java EE brand is potentially a good thing. The issue is a largely forced distance from the Java brand as well, not just the Java EE brand. I think it's hard to argue the Java brand is not a good thing to retain.
>
> I think the linked JotForm default text makes the distinction quite clear. The text actually largely describes our community's joint position already. Perhaps it is worth a brief read. There is no need to ultimately submit the form if one is not compelled.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2017, at 4:16 PM, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:martijnverburg@gmail.com >> wrote:
>
> I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and say that sadly the Java EE brand is seen as a negative thing. Unfortunately we were never able to shake off the dire reputation of J2EE, despite the vast improvements to the platform.
>
> I think a clean break is actually a *good* thing.
>
> Cheers,
> Martijn
>
> On 12 November 2017 at 18:05, reza_rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> I am very glad someone like yourself from the vendor/EC side see this as an issue and is willing to publicly identify this as an issue.
>
> This is by far one of the biggest issues we have identified so far in the Java EE Guardians community. As an initial step, we have asked the community to send Oracle and other key EE4J stakeholders direct and personal feedback on this: https://form.jotform.com/72648425384161 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >. I suspect it is the sole matter with regards to EE4J that these folks have been reached out to about the most.3A__form.jotform.com_ 72648425384161&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_ iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r= R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s=0ao_ Pby1v5Snv9D3MzcoMkDetcXBLWKQXY TOB1kx28s&e=
>
> Unfortunately clearly the community has still not really been heard on this matter. While I am sure the root cause of this issue is Oracle's legal and branding departments being overly rigid, this is something that Oracle executives can intervene on if they deemed it worthy of solving.
>
> From the Java EE Guardians community, our likely next steps are to arrive at a joint open letter asking EE4J stakeholders to address this issue - Oracle being the main party of our request. Any support you can lend us in this regard, even if only moral, would be helpful and highly appreciated.
>
> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Greg Luck <gluck@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gluck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> Date: 11/3/17 2:07 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ee4j-community@eclipse.org >
> Subject: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
>
> Hi
>
> Had a call with Mike today about moving JCache across to EE4J.
>
> We have JCache 1.1 in the JCP review process now and it should be out in a few weeks? time. So we could consider moving after that point.
>
> The biggest issue to me is that, at least currently, any new APIs will not be allowed to use javax. Today we use javax.cache. This would mean that JCache 2 would need to change its package name. We have 13 implementations out there and a huge amount of user code that uses javax.cache. This would be an extremely disruptive change.
>
> In our case Oracle is a copyright owner along with myself for the spec. As an owner, Oracle if they wished, should be able to allow JCache 2 to continue to use the javax.cache package even though the process has changed from JCP to the yet unnamed and to be formed Eclipse Community Process.
>
> Interested in anyone?s thoughts on this.
>
> Regards
>
> Greg Luck
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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- <https://urldefense.community proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_ listinfo_ee4j-2Dcommunity&d= DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- siA1ZOg&r=R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= 1aURO5_ qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v 3qZ5-A&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- <https://urldefense.community proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_ listinfo_ee4j-2Dcommunity&d= DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- siA1ZOg&r=R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= 1aURO5_ qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v 3qZ5-A&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- <https://urldefense.community proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >____________________3A__dev.eclipse.org_mailman_ listinfo_ee4j-2Dcommunity&d= DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- siA1ZOg&r=R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= 1aURO5_ qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v 3qZ5-A&e= ___________________________
> 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?u=https-3A__dev. <https://urldefense.eclipse.org_mailman_listinfo_ ee4j-2Dcommunity&d=DwICAg&c= jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r= R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_ zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr_4&m= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= 1aURO5_ qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v 3qZ5-A&e= 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= b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll- Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s= 1aURO5_ qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v 3qZ5-A&e=
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
---
Mark Little
mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mlittle@xxxxxxxxxx>
JBoss, by Red Hat
Registered Address: Red Hat Ltd, 6700 Cork Airport Business Park, Kinsale Road, Co. Cork.
Registered in the Companies Registration Office, Parnell House, 14 Parnell Square, Dublin 1, Ireland, No.304873
Directors:Michael Cunningham (USA), Vicky Wiseman (USA), Michael O'Neill, Keith Phelan, Matt Parson (USA)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20171114/8d0dca3f/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 3, Issue 35
*********************************************