Markus,
Thanks a lot for that. I of course have some say via the ballot, but I
hope, e.g. Linda/Bill may do the needful in talking to the Spec Lead about
it if necessary.
Will probably update the Bugzilla ticket with your pointer.
Cheers,
Werner
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Markus Eisele <myfear_at_web.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> According to their Draft Edition of the Public Review Specification
> they require Java 6 or higher.
> I would suggest, that they have to update to a hard dependency on EE 7
> or at least SE 7 to qualify for inclusion into EE 7.
> According to EE.B.1.1
> Java EE 7 requires Java SE 7
>
> Here you go ...
> - M
>
> On 20 January 2013 18:00, Werner Keil <werner.keil_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > Linda/all,
> >
> > I wanted to run this by you, as Linda's "fear" she expressed last week at
> > the JCP EC Meeting that Spec Lead or EG Members of Java Batch (JSR 352)
> > argue, they wish to keep redundancies to Java 7 (AutoCloseable) for the
> sake
> > of backward-compatibility with some old JVMs, and EE Containers and a
> JDK,
> > which is scheduled for Sun-down this February.
> >
> > What is your oppinion on that? I was under the impression, the idea of
> > "Simplification" and "Harmonization" for EE 7 wants to address exactly
> cases
> > like that, or would you prefer it to duplicate things that the Platform
> > (SE7/EE7) already defined elsewhere?
> >
> > I remember, other EC Members, Oracle and Red Hat primarily expressed
> > discomfort with some aspects of JSR 352 being incompatible with Java EE
> 7.
> > That is clearly another one, regardless if those members spotted it
> earlier
> > or not.
> >
> > Thanks and Regards,
> > --
> >
> > Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member | Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel
> > Language Champion | Java Godfather
> >
> > Twitter @wernerkeil | #Java_Social | #EclipseUOMo | #OpenDDR
> >
> > Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
> >
> > * Social Media Week: February 18 2013, Hamburg, Germany. Werner Keil, JCP
> > Executive Committee Member, Agorava Co-Founder will present "Enterprise
> > Social using Open Source Frameworks like Agorava"
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: <bugzilla-daemon_at_java.net>
> > Date: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:40 AM
> > Subject: [Bug 4518] Both ItemReader and ItemWriter should extend
> > AutoCloseable
> > To: keilw_at_java.net
> >
> >
> > http://java.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4518
> >
> > --- Comment #8 from mminella_at_java.net 2013-01-20 04:40:41 UTC ---
> > I would argue that, as Chris brought up in his original response to this
> > issue,
> > the AutoClosable interface would be of limited (at best) usefulness for
> an
> > ItemReader or ItemWriter. As he points out, the open and close methods
> are
> > not
> > called as part of the public API, and even if it was, there isn't a
> concrete
> > association with an ItemReader/ItemWriter with a resource. It could be
> > accessing a file, a database, a method on an object, a web service, etc.
> > The
> > coupling of this to a resource like this doesn't make sense to me.
> >
> > However, the cost of adding it and changing the required JDK version to
> 1.7
> > is
> > huge IMHO. I'd vote for not implementing this interface and keeping the
> JDK
> > requirement at 1.6.
> >
> > --
> > Configure bugmail: http://java.net/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> > ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> > You reported the bug.
>