Santiago/all,
Then you might want to drop or rephrase the sentence "Java EE 7 products
will be allowed to implement JAX-RS 2.1" unless the aim is to provide a
highly modular "Mix & Match" profiling for EE 8 or "stripped"
implementations under EE 8?;-)
If a Java EE 7 product ran under SE 8 does that mean you aimed at
"upgrading" only the JAX-RS 2.0 part (since 2.0 is part of EE 7) rather
than upgrading the application to EE 8?
Werner
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
> To: users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 09:09:52 -0400
> Subject: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: Digest for list
> users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> Hi Werner,
>
> Inlined ...
>
> One thing that goes along the lines of Markus' and Sergey's reply (which I
> quote below as the only ones)
> > Additionally, Java EE 7 products will be allowed to implement JAX-‐RS
> 2.1.
>
> That implies, the API (not necessarily the RI) refrains from any direct
> link to Java SE 8, such as new types (e.g. java.time, though for a
> value-agnostic JSR like JAX-RS or MVC this won't really matter, unlike e.g.
> JAX-B or JSON-B, which got one of the highest priorities for EE 8) or
> things like the @FunctionalInterface annotation as well as "default" in
> interfaces, etc.
>
>
> No, that's not the intent. A Java EE 7 product that implements JAX-RS 2.1
> will need to run on SE 8. As stated in an earlier message, there are EE 7
> products that are already certified to run on SE 8.
>
>
> MVC 1.0 does not say it wants to support Java EE 7
>
>
> Right, is a new spec that starts with EE 8.
>
> , while CDI 2 at least in 2.3 of the proposal states
> The work will track Java(TM) EE 8, to be released as part of the Java(TM)
> EE 8 platform. The Java(TM) SE support of the spec will be based on
> Java(TM) SE 8.
>
> So "spec" sounds like API, but especially CDI sometimes considered things
> to be RI in the past, so if mandatory parts of a CDI API don't rely on Java
> SE 8, the RI under an EE 8 umbrella might do so again.
>
>
> I interpret "based on Java SE 8" to mean "we are free to use any SE 8
> features, and if we do, you won't be able to run it on SE 7". So this is
> just like JAX-RS 2.1.
>
> As Sergey also hinted, that is a two-headed sword. You might get the
> "goodies" of SE 8 like Lambdas, etc. but keep in mind, an API that relies
> on SE 8 cannot be implemented by anything under EE 7 with an SE 7 JVM. Nor
> will the RI or any implementation of that API work with an older Java
> version.
>
>
> Right. In those cases, you still have JAX-RS 2.0 implementations
> available.
>
> Any new JSR will have to ask itself if it wants to be compatible with at
> least a large percentage of Java 6 or 7 users, or immediately throw them
> into the Java SE 8 "pond" for the API.
>
>
> We need to think down the road. By the time EE 8 is finished, unless
> plans change, it is possible for the latest SE 7 update release (from
> Oracle) to be nearly 2 years old. In contrast, I think the latest SE 6 came
> out in late 2012 or early 2013, much closer to EE 7.
>
> -- Santiago
>
>
> -------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Markus KARG" <markus_at_headcrashing.eu>
> To: <jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:03:17 +0200
> Subject: [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 JSR
> You can list me as a supporter for JAX-RS 2.1.
>
> May I use the anticipated list of targeted items from your PDF in public
> talks on JAX-RS's future?
>
> 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.
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
> To: <jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 22:02:55 +0100
> Subject: [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 JSR
> On 19/08/14 18:03, Markus KARG wrote:
>
>> You can list me as a supporter for JAX-RS 2.1.
>>
>> May I use the anticipated list of targeted items from your PDF in public
>> talks on JAX-RS's future?
>>
> I'd like to refer to them too.
>
>
>> 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.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:15 AM, <users-request_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Table of contents:
>>
>> 1. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] JAX-RS 2.1 JSR - Santiago
>> Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
>> 2. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] MVC 1.0 JSR - Santiago
>> Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
>> 3. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 JSR - Sergey
>> Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
>> 4. [jax-rs-spec users] Re: [jsr339-experts] MVC 1.0 JSR - Joshua Wilson <
>> javajoshw_at_gmail.com>
>> 5. [jax-rs-spec users] Re: [jsr339-experts] MVC 1.0 JSR - Santiago
>> Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
>> 6. [jax-rs-spec users] Re: [jsr339-experts] MVC 1.0 JSR - arjan tijms <
>> arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>> 7. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 JSR - "Markus
>> KARG" <markus_at_headcrashing.eu>
>> 8. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: MVC 1.0 JSR - "Markus KARG" <
>> markus_at_headcrashing.eu>
>> 9. [jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: JAX-RS 2.1 JSR - Sergey
>> Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Santiago.PericasGeertsen_at_oracle.com>
>> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
>> Cc:
>> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 10:29:30 -0400
>> Subject: [jax-rs-spec users] [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
>>
>>
>> End of digest for list users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net - Wed, 20 Aug 2014
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
> To: "users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net" <users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net>
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 23:02:49 +0200
> Subject: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: [jsr339-experts] JAX-RS 2.1 JSR
> On Tuesday, August 19, 2014, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
>
> If there are internal restrictions that prevent upgrading beyond Java 1.5
> (or 1.7 for that matter), then why wouldn't there be similar restrictions
> for upgrading JAX-RS?
>
> In other words, wouldn't people stuck on an older JDK not also be stuck on
> an older JAX-RS?
>
> Kind regards,
> Arjan Tijms
>
>
>> Making Java 7 a base stack for 2.1 would work IMHO.
>>
>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> End of digest for list users_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net - Fri, 22 Aug 2014
>
>