Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-wg] [jakarta.ee-spec] Defining Jakarta EE 12 Scope in Program Plan
Do you mind suggesting alternative verbiage? How about “Provide modernized equivalents of all key EJB functionality using CDI across the platform”?
 
Even if we cannot achieve complete consensus by October 31, I would like to see what level of consensus could indeed be achieved. For example, at a bare minimum, can we commit to a projected delivery date and Java SE support? The release plan (draft?) appears to do so?

From: Brian Stansberry <brian.stansberry@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>; jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>; JakartaEE Spec Project Leadership discussions <jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] Defining Jakarta EE 12 Scope in Program Plan
 
I'm not in a position to provide a lot of feedback by October 31.

A quick input is that we should be cautious about language like 'Fully replace EJB with equivalent CDI centric functionality across the platform'. People are going to read that and interpret it as 'we're removing EJB in EE 12' when actually https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U2qEqF9K969t5b3YuX4cwex5LJPvF3bt1w27cdKNpDM/edit?usp=gmail talks about how "we can declare our intent to deprecate EJB". Your more detailed write up is about covering the EJB use cases via other specs so EE 12 users don't have barriers to moving away from EJB.

I understand EJB makes marketing pitches harder, but OTOH a lot of people use it and I don't think scaring them will help Jakarta EE.

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 10:36 AM Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes, I understand you folks have been discussing EE 12 to some extent. What I would like to see is if we can achieve more concrete early consensus (including at least some things we can all agree is important to try and deliver) that can be documented (and publicized) as part of the Working Group Program Plan itself.
 
From: Brian Stansberry <brian.stansberry@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 5:15 PM
To: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>; jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>; JakartaEE Spec Project Leadership discussions <jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] Defining Jakarta EE 12 Scope in Program Plan
 
Thank you, Reza, for kickstarting this.

That said, I don't see anything on https://jakartaee.github.io/platform/jakartaee12/JakartaEE12ReleasePlan about November 2024.

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 9:34 AM Reza Rahman via jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Speaking to a friendly JUG leader at Open Community for Java about this, I think I should be even more explicit about deadlines.

The Program Plan is due by the first week of November. To include a specific scope for EE 12 in the Program Plan, a reasonable level of consensus must be achieved by October 31 at the latest. Ideally consensus by October 29 would be great as this is when the next Steering Committee meeting is.
 
From: Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2024 11:30 AM
To: jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>; jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>; JakartaEE Spec Project Leadership discussions <jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Defining Jakarta EE 12 Scope in Program Plan
 
Hi folks,

I would like to see if we can define clear, compelling, and specific
scope for Jakarta EE 12 as part of the Steering Committee Program Plan:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xUNDHMP_qTHH1wA3m0yCmWVf_sHp41Qd7Opq3FhgINs/edit?usp=sharing.
I believe this is of critical importance at this juncture. If I did not
think so, I would not bother trying. I have detailed all the rationale
here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U2qEqF9K969t5b3YuX4cwex5LJPvF3bt1w27cdKNpDM/edit?usp=sharing.
For those that recall, something very similar was done for Jakarta EE
11, so this isn't exactly without precedent.

I would like to see if this can be done in the following couple of
weeks, when the Program Plan is due.

Thanks,

Reza


Reza Rahman

Principal Program Manager

Java on Azure at Microsoft

reza.rahman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

+1 717 329 8149

_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec


--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP
WildFly Project Lead
He/Him/His

Reza Rahman

Principal Program Manager

Java on Azure at Microsoft

reza.rahman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

+1 717 329 8149



--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP
WildFly Project Lead
He/Him/His

Reza Rahman

Principal Program Manager

Java on Azure at Microsoft

reza.rahman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

+1 717 329 8149

Back to the top