Fine for me if Java EE 8 will come with only modularity change in a
short timeframe after Java EE 7
Florent
On 09/28/2011 08:43 AM, Bill Shannon wrote:
> We're putting off modularity to EE 8. We really have no choice in that
> if we want to be aligned with the module system in SE 8.
>
> The possibility to consider is whether putting off other things as well
> would allow us to deliver EE 7 sooner, and if so would that be a good
> thing?
>
> Jeff Genender wrote on 09/27/2011 04:40 PM:
>> 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.
>>>
>>
>