Hi…
> Am 03.06.2015 um 11:59 schrieb Werner Keil <werner.keil_at_gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Oliver/all,
>
> Interesting point, thanks for the initiative (a more coordinated effort by the PMO currently does not seem a priority under JCP.next, but several other mostly Oracle lead JSRs did that on GitHub, plus every notable JSR that's either active right now or just finished also use GitHub as their main repositories)
I am not into the process details. All I was trying to say is: some specs have been way more up to date in the way they work – even for Java EE 7 – than JPA has been so far. I wondered whether there are any reasons that could prevent a next iteration of JPA not to follow that model.
And yes, JPA.next not being started so far played into my suggestion. I guess if it already had been in a certain way, it would've been dramatically more complicated to change it.
> While we saw some people also actively involved in the JCP (even former Spec Leads) leave Pivotal recently is it safe to assume you have no such plans in the forseable future?;-)
To be honest I don't get the question or the context.
> There is no JSR proposal for JPA under the Java EE 8 Umbrella, and while still possible, I guess anything other than a MR would have to start soon to still make it there.
The EG mailing list has been remarkably silent since mid August 2014. The last thing I heard was Linda stating that a JPA revamp in JavaEE 8 will be of small scope. There are quite a few issues open in the bug tracker [0] and I think quite a few of them are worth approaching. Whatever lead to the decision of a small release is not entirely clear to me.
Linda's email didn't really create the impression skipping JPA for an update in JavaEE 8 was an option. I wonder what impression that would make to the community, esp. if JavaEE 8 is still more than a year ahead.
I just thought I'd start the discussion…
Cheers,
Ollie
[0]
https://java.net/jira/issues/?jql=project+%3D+JPA_SPEC+AND+status+%3D+Open+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC
>
> Kind Regards,
> Werner Keil | JCP Executive Committee Member, JSR 363 Co Spec Lead | Eclipse UOMo Lead, Babel Language Champion | Apache Committer | Advisory Board Member, Java Track Chair, DWX '15
> Twitter @wernerkeil | @UnitAPI | @JSR354 | @JSR377 | @AgoravaProj | #DeviceMap | #DevOps | #EclipseUOMo
> Skype werner.keil | Google+ gplus.to/wernerkeil
>
>
>
>
> Werner Keil
> about.me/wernerkeil
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Oliver Gierke <ogierke_at_pivotal.io> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> independently of the scope of the upcoming JPA specification I wondered what you're plans are about aligning the specification process of that upcoming version with a more state-of-the art style.
>
> I've seen the CDI guys are leading by quite a bit compared to us (spec in Asciidoc, public repo for spec and API, public repo for TCK) and I wonder whether there might be any good reason for the next JPA spec not to follow that model. I've reserved the "jpa-spec" organization name on GitHub to avoid anyone is hijacking it as this email will become public. Happy to hand over the organization to anyone who wants to be in charge.
>
> As it apparently has been decided that the scope is rather small for this iteration [0] it might be a chance to improve on meta things.
>
> Cheers,
> Ollie
>
> [0] https://java.net/projects/jpa-spec/lists/jsr338-experts/archive/2014-08/message/4
> [1] https://github.com/jpa-spec
>
> --
> /**
> * @author Oliver Gierke - Senior Software Engineer
> *
> * @param email ogierke_at_pivotal.io
> * @param phone +49-151-50465477
> * @param fax +49-351-418898439
> * @param skype einsdreizehn
> * @see http://www.olivergierke.de
> */
>
>
--
/**
* @author Oliver Gierke - Senior Software Engineer
*
* @param email ogierke_at_pivotal.io
* @param phone +49-151-50465477
* @param fax +49-351-418898439
* @param skype einsdreizehn
* @see http://www.olivergierke.de
*/