> >> IMO, an integrated platform is just as important as an independent
> spec.
> >
> > +1. That's why we tried very hard to contact BV folks (for 2 months!)
> in the summer to find out what is their schedule. We tried convince
> them to release early and notified them about the risk of not
> delivering early. We also slipped our schedule as much as we could and
> postponed the JAX-RS PR submission for over a month while waiting for
> their decision in hope that BV will commit to an earlier release.
> Unfortunately, that didn't happen. So I refuse any statements that
> would indicate that we would not care about the integrated Java EE
> platform. Try to convince BV spec lead to release in the beginning of
> Feb and we can still re-introduce BV support.
> >
>
> Then, IMO, a 2.0MR should be done to coincide with EE7 release. The
> thing is, the suggested addition to JAX-RS spec will still be the same
> before and after BV 1.1 is released.
+1
EE 7 MUST have BV in JAX-RS, even if this shifts the GA of EE 7.
That being said I would suggest the EE 7 spec lead should tell clear words
to the BV team. In the end the users do not wait for single JAX-RS and BV
specs, but for EE 7 spec *containing* BV in JAX-RS.