Bill,
Regarding your original email, I wasn't sure if you were referring to putting off modularity to EE8 or you meant putting off other things?
Jeff
On Sep 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Bill Shannon wrote:
> Jason T. Greene wrote on 9/27/11 1:51 PM:
>> On 9/27/11 2:56 PM, Bill Shannon wrote:
>>
>> -snip-
>>
>>> We have considered several
>>> alternatives moving forward, including delivering Java EE 7 with the
>>> remaining content as planned, or splitting the Java EE 7 release into
>>> smaller Java EE 7 and Java EE 8 releases, with only a small time gap
>>> between those two releases, and with Java EE 8 containing only
>>> modularity support and any remaining original content from Java EE 7.
>>>
>>> I know this will be a disappointment to all of us, but I'm sure you'll
>>> understand the constraints and agree that alignment with the upcoming
>>> Java SE module system is essential.
>>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> I definitely think this was the right decision to make, and relay Red Hat's
>> support. Due to the massive impact modularity will have I think it's more
>> important that EE and SE be cleanly aligned, then for us to be early.
>
> Thanks for the support.
>
>> The idea you mention above of fast tracking EE7 is interesting. Does this imply
>> revisiting the main goals? We would love to see some more work on unifying the
>> specs (e.g. common services like tx, sec, and so on), and that seems more
>> achievable in a short time frame.
>
> At this point we're just collecting input.
>
> It sounds like you're suggesting that we scale back some (unnamed) goals
> and doing more work to unify specs. We're still considering the resource
> impact of the various possibilities but at this point we think we'd likely
> have to remove more than just modularity to make a significant difference
> in the EE 7 schedule.
>
> Still, I'm interested in what additional spec unification you'd like to see.
>