Hi people,
I am usually here in read-only mode, but today I want to add some
thoughts on this Java version discussion if you allow me. Since we are
talking about Java EE 8, so AFAIK it is scheduled to Q3 2016, 2 years
from now, which gives mostly 3 years of Java 8. If Java EE 8 does not
ask for Java 8 now, probably it will happen maybe just at Java EE 9,
which could be release 3 or 4 years after Java EE 8, which means Java
8 will be around 6 years old. The question here IMHO is if it a issue
or not.
Personally speaking I prefer to see a updated spec already taking use
of the new Java 8 APIs.
In the case where EG choose Java 7 as the version to go, I believe at
least some good practices, as described in this article for example
[1], could be followed to allow people whom are already using Java 8
to keep using the new stuff, as well making a future upgrade of this
spec to Java 8 possible, but in the same time keep compatible with
Java 7.
Best regards
[1]
http://java.dzone.com/articles/api-designers-be-careful
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com> wrote:
> 2.2 What is the target Java platform:
>
> This specification is targeted for Java SE 8
> or higher and Java EE 8 or higher
> platforms.
>
>
> followed by
>
> This JSR will be available standalone. It is
> also targeted for inclusion in the Java EE
> 8 platform.
> Additionally, Java EE 7 products will be
> allowed to implement JAX-‐RS 2.1.
>
> I think Java EE 7 won't be allowed to implement it 2.1 would be based on
> Java 8, right ?
>
> IMHO, it has to be Java 7
>
> Sergey
>
>
> On 20/08/14 17:29, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> I.e, which of the featured of JAX-RS 2.1 strictly require Java 8 ?
>>
>> Thanks, Sergey
>> On 20/08/14 17:27, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry. lets not worry about 1.5. It was not about 1.5 but about the fact
>>> that it will a long time for people to migrate from 7 to 8 and I only
>>> referred to Java 5 as an example of how long it may take for people to
>>> migrate.
>>>
>>> Santiago: why Java 8 ? It's too high. We won't be able to support it for
>>> a couple of years probably. Can we lower it down to 1.7 ? JAX-RS 2.0 is
>>> 1.6, JAX-RS 2.1, not 3.0, - 1.8. Too high.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>
>>> If JSR 2.1 mandates Java 8 than I can not list myself as a supporter.
>>> On 20/08/14 17:15, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, as you intend to target Java SE 8, it might me a good idea to add
>>>>>> a mandatory item to that list: Supporting the new language features,
>>>>>> in particular lambda expressions, streams API, and Consumers /
>>>>>> Producers. Those are what people most commonly understand unter "8",
>>>>>> so it would be a shame if we do not overhaul the API using that
>>>>>> features.
>>>>>
>>>>> Java 8 would be too early, same way as Java 7 was to early was Java
>>>>> 2.0.
>>>>> We have users still on Java 1.5 due to the internal restrictions.
>>>>> Making
>>>>
>>>> Java 7 a base stack for 2.1 would work IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> But the draft says that Java 8 is the base of the JSR, so what sense
>>>> does it
>>>> makes to enforce _that_ but not _using_ any of the implied features? To
>>>> support your issue the result would be to reduce the draft to mandate
>>>> Java
>>>> 5. Unless that is truly what you have in mind, it is senseless to be
>>>> against
>>>> usage of Java 8 _features_, as Java 8 implies a binary format which
>>>> does not
>>>> load on JRE 5 anyways.
>>>>
>>>> So what is your actual idea? Mandate Java 5 or mandate Java 8 with
>>>> Java 5
>>>> binary format?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers, Sergey
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Markus
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Santiago Pericas-Geertsen
>>>>> [mailto:Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com]
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 19. August 2014 16:30
>>>>> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
>>>>> Subject: [jsr339-experts] JAX-RS 2.1 JSR
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Experts,
>>>>>
>>>>> After collecting the feedback on this alias as well as that of the
>>>>> community (via the survey), we are ready to move forward with JAX-RS
>>>>> version 2.1. We decided to spin off the MVC work into a separate JSR,
>>>>> now called MVC 1.0. It is likely that MVC 1.0 will define integration
>>>>> points with JAX-RS, but it will be up to the MVC EG group to define
>>>>> those. In addition, MVC 1.0 may support other types of controllers.
>>>>>
>>>>> In preparation for the JSR submission, I'd like to ask if I can list
>>>>> your name as a _supporter_ for JAX-RS 2.1 (Note that becoming a
>>>>> supporter is different from an EG member). If you want to be listed as
>>>>> a supporter, please respond to this message as soon as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking forward to working with you again. Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Santiago
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sergey Beryozkin
>
> Talend Community Coders
> http://coders.talend.com/
>
> Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
--
Michel Graciano
http://www.michelgraciano.com.br
http://java.net/projects/genesis
http://java.net/projects/copypastehistory