Re: [cn4j-alliance] MP apis and "graduation" to Jakarta EE

[Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'll disagree with this premise as even today I would not agree that the Jakarta WG is where a given CN4J oriented spec is where we would want to introduce it.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:31 PM arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:13 PM Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The MP working group is not at all open to discussing the possibility of identifying a small subset of MP that can be considered for maintaining in a backwards compatible way moving forward?

Wasn't it originally the case that pretty much all APIs that are now in MP, would have been in EE?

Kind regards,

Arjan

 

_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance