The EE implementation already exists but is 'tied in' with being compatible
with other EE APIs. The proposed SE implementation has come about because
people feel that it should be a core part of the language now (like JAXP
is). I suspect the SE spec would be a subset of the EE one focusing on the
core processing. The EE one could rely on and provide a light layer to
ensure API compatibility with JAX-RS, CDI and so forth. At least that's
how I hope this will play out as at least from the LJC point of view we'd
have a hard time ratifying the JSR if there is a disconnect between the two
as that would make life harder for developers as opposed to easier.
Cheers,
Martijn
On 28 November 2014 at 13:42, John D. Ament <john.d.ament_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Martjin,
>
> Is there anything provided by the EE implementation that wouldn't be
> available in SE?
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 6:18 AM, Martijn Verburg
> <martijnverburg_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > I forget exactly where I left this conversation with the OpenJDK / Java
> SE
> > folks, but we'd *like* to see the Java EE std wrapping around the
> proposed
> > Java SE one. EE should extend SE in this case.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Martijn
> >
> > On 27 November 2014 at 08:26, Antonio Goncalves
> > <antonio.goncalves_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> As an individual, I strongly support the two JSRs on security and
> >> management.
> >>
> >> However, I have some concerns about JSon-P : I know there is a JEP on
> >> having a "lightweight" JSon processing API in Java SE. What would be the
> >> relationship between this JEP and the JSR ?
> >>
> >> Antonio
> >>
> >> Le 27 nov. 2014 09:07, "Mite Mitreski" <mitemitreski_at_gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >>
> >>> Hi Linda,
> >>>
> >>> feel free to list JUGMK as supporter as well as myself as individual
> >>> supporter.
> >>>
> >>> JUGMK - Java User Group Macedonia
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Mite Mitreski
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Java User Group Macedonia (JUGMK)
> >>> http://jug.mk | +38975236045 | http://blog.mitemitreski.com/
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Alexander Salvanos <salvanos_at_gmx.de>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello Linda, Hello everybody,
> >>>>
> >>>> I am an individual member and (if possible) would like to be listed as
> >>>> supporter of the Java EE Security API aswell.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you,
> >>>> Alexander Salvanos
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 27.11.2014 um 00:05 schrieb arjan tijms:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My company, ZEEF, with myself as representative would like to be
> >>>>> listed as supporter of the Java EE Security API.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Kind regards,
> >>>>> Arjan Tijms
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Linda DeMichiel
> >>>>> <linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have submitted to the JCP three more JSRs which we are
> >>>>>> targeting for inclusion in Java EE 8:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Java EE Management API 2.0, https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=373
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Java API for JSON Processing 1.1,
> >>>>>> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=374
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Java EE Security API, https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=375
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please let us know if your company would like to be listed as a
> >>>>>> supporter of any or all of these JSRs. If you are an individual
> >>>>>> member of this expert group, please let us know if you would like to
> >>>>>> be listed as an individual supporting the JSRs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> thanks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Linda
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
>