Guess a MR is also on its way for 2.0 then or expected some time soon?
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>
wrote:
> On 02/01/2015 13:19, Werner Keil wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com
>> <mailto:nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 23/12/2014 14:34, Werner Keil wrote:
>>
>> Looks OK to me as well.
>>
>> One question about https://java.net/jira/browse/__JMS_SPEC-157 <
>> https://java.net/jira/browse/JMS_SPEC-157>
>>
>> It is proposed that the javadoc for the Connection object’s three
>> createSession methods be changed to make it
>> consistent
>> with the Java EE 6 specification and with JMS 2.0 section 12.2.
>>
>> Why does this refer to Java EE 6? Is this an aspect that has not
>> changed with Java EE 7 since then?
>>
>>
>> The JIRA issue referenced explains the background to this issue, and
>> particularly how JMS 2.0 incorporated various
>> incorporate pieces of specification relating to JMS that were
>> previously in Java EE 6, but accidentally introduced
>> an incompatible change when doing so.
>>
>> This issue is about maintaining compatibility between Java EE
>> versions. We need to refer to Java EE 6 when deciding
>> what changes are needed now since it is Java EE 6 that defines the
>> behaviour that Java EE 7 (including JMS 2.0)
>> needs to be compatible with.
>>
>>
>> Would that be something for a JMS 2.0 MR (since Java EE 7 contains 2.0
>> and is unlikely to include 2.1 "on the fly") or
>> would we rather address that with 2.1, hence it wouldn't be changed
>> before Java EE 8 (or solutions that apply JMS 2.1 on
>> top of Java EE 7, that likely depends on how we use CDI, at the moment
>> CDI 2 aims for Java SE 8+ so it's less likely
>> you'd get CDI 2 without EE 8 or a standalone SE 8 app;-)
>>
>
> Yes, compatibility violations in JMS 2.0 need to be corrected immediately
> (in the JMS 2.0 errata that I am proposing) since they prevent vendors
> implementing JMS 2.0.
>
> Nigel
>
>
>