[javaee-spec users] Re: [jsr342-experts] Wish-List for EE 8

From: arjan tijms <>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 19:22:19 +0200

Hi there,

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Antonio Goncalves <> wrote:

> I'm following Arjan ;o)

Really great list! I think we're largely on the exact same page ;)

About the TCK, I know there are some strong arguments against making the
TCK available and there may be certain implications with regards to
certification, but just for me personally having access to a TCK would be
incredibly useful. For the last year I've been doing a certain amount of
research into the various JASPIC implementations. They were all certified,
but I found a lot of things in them that did not seem be in line with what
the spec demanded.

Having access to the TCK would have helped immensely. With that I would be
able to cross-reference it and check if the TCK is maybe incomplete at some
point, or maybe contains a bug (it's software too after all), or is simply
not testing something at all, or... that my interpretation of the spec is
simply wrong.

About the war is the new ear, next to having multiple wars there is one
additional advantage of ears and that's that you can have a crude mechanism
for layering. Meaning, code (not even necessarily EJB beans) in the EJB
module can not directly access web artifacts. This allows some enforcement
of business logic not being able to accidentally use a type from say
PrimeFaces that lives as a jar in a web module. Whether this benefit is
worth the price of the extra complexity is an open question. Hopefully the
Java SE module system will be a better answer to this problem indeed. If
EJB was indeed to be dissolved then the very term "EJB module" wouldn't
even make much sense anymore.

Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms