| Re: [ee4j-pmc] Just changing javax to jakarta in package names |
> The spec names should change but not the package other than replacing javax with jakarta. We already have a lot of work to do with the transition without adding more overhead and honestly, I see no benefit in changing the package names at all.I think there is a benefit, as mentioned that we only really get this chance once. I do appreciate Kevin's concern for the ripple effect, as indeed, every other change is just a small change on top of the previous one. But all together it becomes bigger and bigger.That said, suppose we do indeed only change javax to jakarta, what about packages that contain names that are not to be used anymore, such as javax.jms? In that case I guess we *have* to change "jms" as well, right?Kind regards,Arjan_______________________________________________On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:49 PM Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:+1 to this - perhaps package names can be changed for Jakarta EE 9/10--On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 13:27, Richard Monson-Haefel <rmonson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Just chiming in, I hope that is Ok.The spec names should change but not the package other than replacing javax with jakarta. We already have a lot of work to do with the transition without adding more overhead and honestly, I see no benefit in changing the package names at all. People are used to them, regardless of how strange they might be, and changing them just adds to the confusion. I hope we don't do this on top of everything else. Seems like a waste of resources and a great way to create more issues.On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 4:03 PM Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi,
On a separate discussion thread, Bill Shannon and I were discussing the proposed package renaming...
> I trust this was just used as an example since there is no requirement to change
> anything in the package name other than javax. If a component wishes to change
> the package name (ie. javax.ws.rs.* to jakarta.rest.*), then they are allowed
> to. But, I wouldn't recommend it. Keep the changes to a minimum.
This is indeed a completely separate issue, but the direction from the PMC
so far has been to use package names that are more aligned with the new spec
names.
I don't remember that we, as the PMC, were recommending to modify the package names to be more aligned with the new spec names. And, personally, I wouldn't recommend it. The more we change, the more angst it produces for our customers. Just change javax to jakarta and be done with it. (IMHO)
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Java EE architect
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
--_______________________________________________Richard Monson-Haefel
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
Cheers, Martijn (Sent from Gmail Mobile)_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc