Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
Well at the moment JNoSQL is a lot more like Spring Data than a JSR or formal standard. So there is no need to separate API from implementations. Spring Data MongoDB is also somewhere under "org.springframework" just like the interfaces or abstract base classes making up the "API" in its case.

EE4J may end up as something like Log4J or SLF4J of the Enterprise space.
Neither of them are standards or JSRs either, but both are much more popular and widely used than the official java.util.logging part of OpenJDK ;-)

Werner


On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 8:09 PM, <ee4j-community-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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: Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects (Manik Magar)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 14:09:01 -0500
From: Manik Magar <manik.magar@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
Message-ID:
        <CAHtV0bDe8QGf86MnFm__JX-w_Eh7Sr+fikvGtS3ZnjnC4WVCdA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

To make things more clear, I think the common base package (javax.* or
org.ee4j.* or org.eclipse.javax.*[don't know if this is possible] or
whatever makes sense) for new API's should be decided as soon as possible
and I know it may not be that easy :) but it could help to avoid package
variations in the proposed API's.

For JNoSQL, Diana (org.jnosql.diana.*) does have implementation for various
NoSQL database like couchbase, mongodb etc. All of these are for now
extending the same base package org.jnosql.diana  e.g.
org.jnosql.diana.couchbase or org.jnosql.diana.mongodb  .

AFAIK, All these (Reference?) Implementations are driven by the community
and not by the NoSQL vendors, which could be the reason they are in the
same base package. If vendor's implement their drivers based on API, they
could have a different package, similar to what we see in vendor-specific
JDBC implementations.

#My1Cent :)


Regards,
Manik Magar



On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Kevin,
>
> Thanks for the concrete example. As for JNoSQL, while details on how
> exactly it might be incorporated into another "standard" or umbrella are as
> vague and to be paved as in other cases, the (Eclipse) project already
> exists under http://jnosql.org/
>
> Therefore close to what you hinted, the public API uses "org.jnosql.*"
> which is also registered (whether or not it's been delegated to Eclipse
> Foundation not sure, but it that'll be its package for some time I trust it
> will be handled like e.g. microprofile.io) and until the question of a RI
> or default implementation is further laid out, other parts like Artemis
> also share this package. It is possible some implementation modules could
> use "org.eclipse.jnosql" instead.
>
> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Maintenance Lead |
> Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer
>
> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @AgoravaProj | @TamayaConf |
> @OpenDDR | #EclipseUOMo
> Skype werner.keil
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 6:00 PM, <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: Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects (Kevin Sutter)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 08:05:47 -0600
>> From: "Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Use of javax.* in new EE4J projects
>> Message-ID:
>>         <OFC11BBDB4.54B010C4-ON862581D7.004D179D-862581D7.004D6EC6@n
>> otes.na.collabserv.com>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> 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 <(507)%20253-3620> (office)
>> LinkedIn: 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" 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?
>>
>> 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>)
>> 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>
>> 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> 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. I
>> suspect it is the sole matter with regards to EE4J that these folks have
>> been reached out to about the most.
>>
>> 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>
>> Date: 11/3/17 2:07 PM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> 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
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> 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://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://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?u=https-3A__dev.ecl
>> ipse.org_mailman_listinfo_ee4j-2Dcommunity&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaS
>> HvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=R9dtOS3afYnRUmu_zogmh0VnVYl2tse_V7QBUA9yr
>> _4&m=b_vTeQOmwB1585BadfMll-Cc5aCWacnokkUnueEf-qM&s=
>> 1aURO5_qrTH4KUGplh6f883VN8ViLWd64OZ9v3qZ5-A&e=
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j-community/atta
>> chments/20171113/3aea927b/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 25
>> *********************************************
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j-community/attachments/20171113/eb9cd42a/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 29
*********************************************

Back to the top