I have to agree we need to do better on this. In this case, Rahman is
basically volunteering to do this in the community for free. I am also
happy to help on this as are many others.
On 5/17/2016 4:55 PM, arjan tijms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the quick response
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Linda DeMichiel
> <linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com <mailto:linda.demichiel_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> However, we are not planning to update specs that would not be updated
> except for repeating annotations.
>
>
> If you mean that just repeating annotations would be too small for a
> MR, then I'm sure that for the majority of those specs some additional
> small additions or clarifications can be found. From what I've
> witnessed in the past, a MR can be completed in a relatively small
> amount of time, can't it?
>
> Slightly offtopic, or perhaps not, but I have to say that waiting for
> individual specs to plan an update for something that is in fact part
> of a bigger topic or epic, is a bit of a non-optimal point in the Java
> EE spec and JCP process.
>
> We strived in the past to split out several concerns to individual
> specs. This is often a good thing indeed, but if it turns out to be so
> difficult now to add tiny small things to a whole slew of specs,
> because for each a planning needs to be in place that is not there,
> then this is perhaps not so much of an improvement.
>
> For example, if JSF still had its own EL, we (JSF EG) could fairly
> trivially make a small change there. But now EL is a separate spec,
> and just because there is no update for it planned, that exact same
> code change suddenly becomes practically impossible. Not because of a
> technical challenge, but because of administrative obstacles.
>
> I think it was never quite the idea to intentionally put those
> roadblocks in place, was it?
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
>
> For example, the Common Annotations MR that I'm planning to
> submit to address the @Priority change requested by CDI
> 2.0 will also
> address repeating annotations for @Resource and
> @DataSourceDefinition.
>
>
> Sounds good, thanks!
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
> -Linda
>
>
> On 5/17/16 12:57 PM, Reza Rahman wrote:
>
> Bit disappointing not to hear from a few more experts
> on this and
> specifically the Oracle leads. This should be easy to
> incorporate into
> the RI and simultaneously an important area to align
> Java EE 8
> with Java
> SE 8.
>
> On 5/11/2016 8:29 AM, arjan tijms wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This should principally fit in perfectly with Java
> EE 8. The
> JSR has
> "Alignment with Java SE 8" as one of the major
> topics. See
> https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=366
>
> I think each constituent spec has to be addresses
> separately. As
> you've signed the OCA, then if I'm not mistaken
> you can do
> PRs or send
> patches to all the RI projects this concerns. E.g.
> for JSF
> you can
> send me (or another Mojarra committer) the patch
> or send a
> PR to my
> Github working repo.
>
> One problem may be that not all specs are active
> at the
> moment (don't
> have an EG at the moment), so if any of those are
> affected I
> think at
> least a MR for them should be started then.
>
> Wonder what the thoughts of others and
> specifically the spec
> leads are
> about this.
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Rahman USTA
> <rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com>
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com>>
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com>
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com
> <mailto:rahman.usta.88_at_gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Java EE has some annotations that they can
> work as
> repeatable
> annotations. I think Java EE 8 should target
> at least
> Java 8 and I
> don't see any reason to support repeatable
> annotation
> feature for
> Java EE 8.
>
> I worked on required changes on current
> Glassfish 5
> version and
> I'm ready to commit required changes to each
> specs.
>
> What are your opinions for this feature
> request? How
> can we move
> forward this?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Rahman USTA
> Istanbul JUG
> https://github.com/rahmanusta
>
>
>
>
>