And so does a relatively recent version of WebLogic (12.1.3.x, I know there were a few updates, but the 12.x has not been replaced yet) at least in the German translation of something like

At least "J2EE" was the correct term at one point, even though it's been obsolete for more than 10 years and we've been calling it "Java EE" longer than it was ever called "J2EE".

Hi, thanks for your replies. Sorry for the wrong wording. I still remember the rebranding vom J2EE to JEE which took a while to traverse through our company... I will now learn to say Java EE. It's

Jens Engel wrote on 08/03/2017 06:16 AM: The EJB spec should have clear functionality requirements that are independent of the remote protocol being used. If this isn't clear in the EJB spec,

Hi Bill, thanks for your answer. I know that there are new ways for building applications but - well - there are existing applications which cannot easily be transformed into this direction - and I

Jens Engel wrote on 08/ 4/17 02:34 AM: Right, which is why I expect many Java EE vendors will be supporting these technologies for quite some time, even after they become optional.

Any thoughts on impact from this? http://www.infoworld.com/article/3217347/java/oracle-doesnt-want-java-ee-any-more.html What will this potentially do to this group? Thanks, Jeff

I'm just amazed Paul Krill wrote an accurate and balanced article :-)

Hi all, Java EE 8 is near release and I'd like to request a simple change on the artifact layout that is published to Maven central. Until Java EE 7 the artifact contained all the API classes packaged

Shouldn't there be a snapshot version e.g. in java.net/maven? (java.net still exists at least for that purpose) Regards, Werner

I can't see it on https://maven.java.net/content/repositories/snapshots/javax/ and I haven't heard of any snapshots being published. I thought that would need to wait until all specs were

try https://maven.java.net/content/repositories/promoted/javax/javaee-api/ thanks, --lukas

Thanks, now I see. The last one seems to be from June. Could you please consider mi suggestion about the artifact layout? Regards, Guillermo González de Agüero

Sorry Lukas, didn't look at the content of the POM. Looks like you already took care of this. That's just great. I see some implementation APIs there though for JSF and JavaMail. Could that APIs be

Excuse me all for flooding. The JSF dependency I was seeing is Mojarra implementation, which I don't think belongs

The Maven project that builds the API jar file does so by recompiling all the javax.* source files. Because some of these source files have static dependencies on non-javax.* classes,

Hi Bill, Sorry, I wasn't able to look at the JAR contents the other day and I only checked the POM. What we have now is, as you said, a JAR which contains all the API classes on it. Its pom declares

Java EE 8 is essentially done. Your suggested fix would result in an API jar file that's not usable by people who aren't using Maven. If some application server provides

> In any event, I'm going to leave this as an issue to be dealt with for Java EE 9. There's going to be a Java EE 9? ;-)

Or whatever you guys end up calling it. Not my problem! :-) Kevin Sutter wrote on 08/31/2017 02:14 PM: