Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jnosql-dev] Spec Status
oh yes about jakarta.ee ... here is a snippet from the blog it redirects to -

' The excitement grew overwhelming when I saw the “ee” domain extension actually existed and “jakarta.ee” domain was still available. So was the twitter handle. So was the github organization. I snatched them all up and shared my enthusiasm for the name with the rest of the EE4J PMC and soon it was the only name any of us could think of.'.

Regards,
Manik




Regards,
Manik Magar



On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Manik,

 

+1 I think this makes most sense now.

Stay on org.jnosql. Until it is clear, if there should be a new Namespace like org.eclipse.ee4j, org.eclipse.jakartaee or similar (Jakarta.org belongs to the Island of Jakarta and someone on GoDaddy just grabbed https://www.whois.com/whois/jakartaee.org hopefully Eclipse Foundation, but if it is a Domaingrabber, Eclipse Foundation will have to deal with them)

 

Regards,

Werner

 

From: Manik Magar
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 14:31
To: Jnosql Developer Discussions
Subject: Re: [jnosql-dev] Spec Status

 

Considering JNoSQL not being part of JCP now, I don’t think we can use javax for any new non-jcp oriented specifications. EE4J and Oracle seems to be clear about who can and who cannot use javax package. Any existing JavaEE APIs that ever led through JCP can retain javax but all new specifications that are not derived by JCP, cannot use javax if it has to be part of new EE4J umbrella. And I am not sure if JCP process is ideal choice now for any new JavaEE targeted APIs. 

 

If the plan is to ultimately be part of EE4J umbrella , then my suggestion would be to stay on org.jnosql and wait for the EE4J package finalization. Hopefully before JNoSQL 1.0 is released, move to the new EE4J package whatever it would be. 

 

In short, wait for some more time.

 

Regards,

Manik

 

 




On Feb 15, 2018 at 7:21 AM, <Lucas Furlaneto> wrote:

I think we should submit a JSR and wait for Eclipse Foundation definition about EE4J process.

 

Eclipse is discussing about EE4J and maybe we can use javax.nosql or just maintain org.jnosql


Lucas Furlaneto

 

2018-02-15 9:01 GMT-02:00 Otávio Gonçalves de Santana <otaviopolianasantana@gmail.com>:

 

Right now, we're stuck in the specification process.

Briefly, Java EE has moved to Eclipse Foundation and them still discussion about their process yet.

So, there're questions that still remain:

 

  • Should we submit a JSR then EE4J?
  • What about the package name API? Should we submit a JSR just to keep the javax.nosql?
  • What is the submission lifecycle? Could we use a JSR as a template?

 

ps: I'm sending these question to EE4J too.

 

 

--

Otávio Gonçalves de Santana


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

 

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

 


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


Back to the top