[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ee4j-community] On Naming
- From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 10:38:12 -0400
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
On 2017-10-01 5:15 AM, Guillermo GonzÃlez de AgÃero wrote:
One question I have on that is wether EE4J could be used as the
OpenJDK equivalent for Java EE and in the same way that MicroProfile
has just done with MP Config: spec developed on an open group and then
submitted to the JCP.It is my understanding that the new specification process will not be
using the JCP.
I envision a very similar idea for EE4J: create working groups,
develop specs and APIs and then, once done, submit a massive "Java EE
9" JSR for it, that will then release the artifacts with the "javax"
package (this point is *really* important), and maintaining the Java
That leaves the application server certification open though. But with
all TCKs sources avaiable, I doubt certification by itself will be so
important as it is now, since everybody will be able to test servers
on their own to verify they are spec complaint.
I also imagine major vendors won't like this option that much since
Oracle would still be responsible of the final "Java EE" release
through the JCP, but I think this can be an acceptable compromise
Is this an option that's on the table?