| Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming and Packaging |
Werner
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: Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming
and Packaging (reza_rahman)
2. Re: Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming
and Packaging (Mike Milinkovich)
3. Re: Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming
and Packaging (Bill Shannon)
4. Re: Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming
and Packaging (Heiko Rupp)
5. Re: Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming
and Packaging (Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:14:41 -0500
From: reza_rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter
on Java EE Naming and Packaging
Message-ID: <mailman.29.1516175304.10174.ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
This new process is frankly another area where far more community feedback is needed and I believe is currently missing.
If we indeed have to live with a rebranding, I believe what the majority of the community and industry would like to see is standardization via an existing body like ISO, ECMA or OASIS. That will carry much more weight with most of my customers than just the Eclipse Foundation as a replacement to the JCP. A majority of the actual work could still be done through the Eclipse Foundation.
Have these possibilities been discussed by the EE4J stakeholders? If so, what decisions were made and why? More importantly, shouldn't such decisions be made with the help of very broad community feedback?
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero <z06.guillermo@xxxxxxxxx> Date: 1/16/18 3:59 PM (GMT-05:00) To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter on Java EE Naming and Packaging
And that's great. A new process with the spirit of the JCP,? but without its lacks. I have no doubt this move will be beneficial for everybody.
But I can't consider it a JCP replacement (in the sense of the home for Java standards) if it lacks former privileges. There's where my doubts lay.?
El mar., 16 ene. 2018 21:51, Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org > escribi?:
On 2018-01-16 3:39 PM, Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero wrote:
> If the JCP doesn't fit the needs of Java EE nomore, then go *replace* it.
That is exactly what is happening here.
The Eclipse Foundation is going to be creating a new specification
process which will replace the role of the JCP as it currently pertains
to Java EE. That new spec process will hopefully fix many of the issues
with the JCP. I can guarantee that it will not have the existing "get
all the IP" Spec Lead role. Similarly I can guarantee that it will not
have any special votes or roles for Oracle or any other special company.
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org
(m) +1.613.220.3223
_______________________________________________
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/ 20180116/15339d07/attachment. html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:04:45 -0500
From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org >
To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter
on Java EE Naming and Packaging
Message-ID:
<ae494776-e959-2b7f-c5a5-550c0f2952dd@eclipse- >foundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
On 2018-01-16 3:59 PM, Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero wrote:
> And that's great. A new process with the spirit of the JCP,? but
> without its lacks. I have no doubt this move will be beneficial for
> everybody.
>
> But I can't consider it a JCP replacement (in the sense of the home
> for Java standards) if it lacks former privileges. There's where my
> doubts lay.
There, at its heart is the dilemma. "I have no doubt this move will be
beneficial for everybody....except I will doubt anything that changes."
(If you will pardon the paraphrasing.)
Sadly, we cannot have our cake and eat it too.
I understand that it would be wonderful if we could construct a scenario
where we had every single good thing about the status quo, coupled with
the goodness that will come from being open and vendor-neutral.
Unfortunately, that cannot happen for the reasons Will explained in the
initial email in this thread. Switching from single vendor to
multi-vendor does come with some unavoidable changes. Everyone involved
in this is working very hard on ensuring backwards compatibility, and
keeping changes to the bare minimum. But some changes cannot be avoided.
>
> El mar., 16 ene. 2018 21:51, Mike Milinkovich
> <mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org
> <mailto:mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org >> escribi?:
>
> On 2018-01-16 3:39 PM, Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero wrote:
> > If the JCP doesn't fit the needs of Java EE nomore, then go
> *replace* it.
>
> That is exactly what is happening here.
>
> The Eclipse Foundation is going to be creating a new specification
> process which will replace the role of the JCP as it currently
> pertains
> to Java EE. That new spec process will hopefully fix many of the
> issues
> with the JCP. I can guarantee that it will not have the existing "get
> all the IP" Spec Lead role. Similarly I can guarantee that it will not
> have any special votes or roles for Oracle or any other special
> company.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20180116/8d53e271/attachment. html
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:57:13 -0800
From: Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>, John
Hogan <jhogan515@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter
on Java EE Naming and Packaging
Message-ID: <c69277ab-6e4e-8649-1483-96bac0df88bc@xxxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
John Hogan wrote on 01/16/18 10:35 AM:
> I do have a concern relating to item 3 in what is being communicated by
> Oracle.? If I'm understanding correctly, and future net new EE4J
> APIs/technologies cannot be placed under javax, does this mean that Oracle
> intends to develop their own new APIs under javax?? Will this result in two
> flavors of Java EE, Oracle's and EE4J's?
No, that is not Oracle's intent.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:30:38 +0100
From: "Heiko Rupp" <hrupp@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "EE4J community discussions" <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter
on Java EE Naming and Packaging
Message-ID: <292E6401-FE97-4DA6-B841-A6CC75961C32@xxxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
On 16 Jan 2018, at 21:39, Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero wrote:
> What we are discussing here is not a replacement but the abandonment
> of the "Standard Enterprise API".
Can you please explain what you mean?
My understanding is that the existing APIs do not change,
but fo new APIs under the umbrella, the (top level) package names
will be different from what they were.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 07:48:11 +0000
From: Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero <z06.guillermo@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Feedback to Joint Community Open Letter
on Java EE Naming and Packaging
Message-ID:
<CAG1ZpUb7FqJ_w8G9-nSijELevsixW7Bs-VM1fL=iaxuZvN= U8Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Your understanding is correct. I mean it won't be possible to create new
specs that fall into the same category as the existing ones (part of the
Java official API). That was one of the biggest values of Java EE for me.
Even if we come to the conclusion that can't use that packages for new
specs, I miss a way to add functionality to the standard API. MicroProfile
did it with Config and JSR 382. I wonder if the same path should be the way
for EE4J: moving to the JCP *specific* components that should be part of
the whole Java API.
El mi?., 17 ene. 2018 a las 8:30, Heiko Rupp (<hrupp@xxxxxxxxxx>) escribi?:
> On 16 Jan 2018, at 21:39, Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero wrote:
>
> > What we are discussing here is not a replacement but the abandonment
> > of the "Standard Enterprise API".
>
> Can you please explain what you mean?
> My understanding is that the existing APIs do not change,
> but fo new APIs under the umbrella, the (top level) package names
> will be different from what they were.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ 20180117/fc2a24d1/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 5, Issue 51
*********************************************