[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] JCP or not (fork of Re: On Naming)
|
I wouldn't consider upgrading Java version requirement a BC breaks. In fact, most EE 8 specs were updated to use repeatable annotations, making them require Java 8.
In the specific case of JSF, a lot of legacy stuff has been maintained that I agree should be removed. Java EE already defines a pruning process that we should evolve for that cases.
But removing long standing deprecated stuff is different that breaking compatibility IMO.
Regards,
Guillermo González de Agüero
Just a quick note to mention that we are always moving forward, and sometimes backward compatibility has to break to bring in new features. For instance, JSF 2.3 requires the use of Java 8, which is basically breaking backward compatibility for that framework.
I don't necessarily think that we need to apply the concept of backward compatibility at the EE4J level, but rather, it needs to be thought of at the specification level. Every specification is different, and some may be able to break backward compatibility, such as JSF. In some specs, it may make more sense to maintain backward compatibility. In my opinion, JPA would be one of those specs since it is so deeply engrained in Java EE applications.
Best Regards
_______________________________________________
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