[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [cdi-dev] Discussion: The new structure of EE integration sections
|
Yes, for EE 11 have all integration requirements moved to the platform spec or one of the platform profiles. This is the position the specification committee took today on this issue.
Hi, Scott, I’m not sure I understand.
> Move the integration requirements out of the Persistence spec and the problem is solved.
What you suggest is to remove any dependencies (integration) from all specs and keep it only in the Profile spec? Or do you suggest something else? Persistence and some other specs already defines some behaviour related to CDI. We had a long discussion of making CDI the main component model in all Jakarta EE specs. Maybe it’s really easier to achieve that by defining all integrations in the Platform spec. But is it possible? Can all specs accept that and not invent any containers in their own, like Rest, Faces and Servlet did in the past? Isn’t it easier yhen to rely on another spec and just say that some features are not supported unless CDI or whatever dependency is not present? I don’t know, I’m raising this as a question.
Ondro
And yet the component spec project has no dependency in terms of CDI artifacts because the TCK tests are already in the platform TCK. It makes me question whether ratification of Persistence has been done correctly because to date we claim it is a wave 0 spec and can be ratified with the standalone TCK produced by the platform TCK team, and yet the specification describes integration requirements. It is just another example of inconsistent handling of integration requirements and dependencies. Move the integration requirements out of the Persistence spec and the problem is solved.
I agree it would be best if all specifications owned the CDI integration concerns, but as Scott mentioned, they don't want to,
In case of Jakarta Persistence, the CDI integration is already part of the spec. There's probably been a mistake in assumptions somewhere.
Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
