|
Java EE 8 dependency JTA issue on modulepath
GlassFish 5.0.1 will use JTA 1.3. The current development release includes this change. We're not planning to publish new versions of the API jar files since this doesn't change the effective API used
GlassFish 5.0.1 will use JTA 1.3. The current development release includes this change. We're not planning to publish new versions of the API jar files since this doesn't change the effective API used
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #89
·
|
|
Question on transaction propagation in EJB remoting
Yes, sorry, Kevin is right. Transaction propagation is only required within a single product instance, which (depending on the architecture of the product) might involve multiple processes (e.g., a cl
Yes, sorry, Kevin is right. Transaction propagation is only required within a single product instance, which (depending on the architecture of the product) might involve multiple processes (e.g., a cl
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #88
·
|
|
Question on transaction propagation in EJB remoting
Yes, transaction propagation is required, but interoperability of transaction propagation between vendors is unspecified. klaus.rothert@... wrote on 08/10/2018 05:30 AM:
Yes, transaction propagation is required, but interoperability of transaction propagation between vendors is unspecified. klaus.rothert@... wrote on 08/10/2018 05:30 AM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #83
·
|
|
Javadoc for Java EE 8?
They're also linked from the Java EE Documentation page. Kevin Sutter wrote on 11/28/17 09:02 AM:
They're also linked from the Java EE Documentation page. Kevin Sutter wrote on 11/28/17 09:02 AM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #81
·
|
|
Platform wide guideline for build-in annotation literals?
Arjan Tijms wrote on 09/19/17 01:29 PM: Some of the annotations have literals and some do not. There may be some rationale for why only some of the annotations need literals, but it wasn't explained.
Arjan Tijms wrote on 09/19/17 01:29 PM: Some of the annotations have literals and some do not. There may be some rationale for why only some of the annotations need literals, but it wasn't explained.
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #74
·
|
|
Platform wide guideline for build-in annotation literals?
The CDI expert group didn't raise this at the platform level, and they didn't even do this consistently for their annotations, so I'm not clear on what their intent is with these annotation instances.
The CDI expert group didn't raise this at the platform level, and they didn't even do this consistently for their annotations, so I'm not clear on what their intent is with these annotation instances.
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #72
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
That's it! Clearly you guys don't appreciate what we're giving you! The deal is off!!! :-) Jeff Genender wrote on 08/31/2017 09:13 PM:
That's it! Clearly you guys don't appreciate what we're giving you! The deal is off!!! :-) Jeff Genender wrote on 08/31/2017 09:13 PM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #68
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
No, sorry. Guillermo González de Agüero wrote on 08/31/2017 03:35 PM:
No, sorry. Guillermo González de Agüero wrote on 08/31/2017 03:35 PM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #65
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
I think you should take this up with the owners of the next release. Ondrej Mihályi wrote on 08/31/2017 03:10 PM:
I think you should take this up with the owners of the next release. Ondrej Mihályi wrote on 08/31/2017 03:10 PM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #62
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
Or whatever you guys end up calling it. Not my problem! :-) Kevin Sutter wrote on 08/31/2017 02:14 PM:
Or whatever you guys end up calling it. Not my problem! :-) Kevin Sutter wrote on 08/31/2017 02:14 PM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #60
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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 a beta API that's not exactly
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 a beta API that's not exactly
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #58
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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, those classes ar
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, those classes ar
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #56
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
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. Java EE issue track
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. Java EE issue track
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #46
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
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, we'll ma
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, we'll ma
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #44
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
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". Suffering from our o
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". Suffering from our o
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #42
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
Jeff Genender wrote on 08/ 2/17 12:08 PM: I know it's like whack-a-mole, but I can whack those moles while still frying fish. And if all the rest of you would help me whack those moles, it might actua
Jeff Genender wrote on 08/ 2/17 12:08 PM: I know it's like whack-a-mole, but I can whack those moles while still frying fish. And if all the rest of you would help me whack those moles, it might actua
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #35
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
Hi Jens. First of all, there is nothing named "JEE". The correct name is "Java EE". "Proposed optional" means that it might be declared optional in the next release. In Java EE 8, it is still required
Hi Jens. First of all, there is nothing named "JEE". The correct name is "Java EE". "Proposed optional" means that it might be declared optional in the next release. In Java EE 8, it is still required
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #33
·
|
|
Location of downloadable files?
Note that the schemas are in GitHub here. Kevin Sutter wrote on 06/ 6/17 11:29 AM:
Note that the schemas are in GitHub here. Kevin Sutter wrote on 06/ 6/17 11:29 AM:
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #19
·
|
|
Location of downloadable files?
All the downloads from our original java.net project are still available in the GitHub repository here. I should probably add a link from the web site to make it more obvious. Kevin Sutter wrote on 06
All the downloads from our original java.net project are still available in the GitHub repository here. I should probably add a link from the web site to make it more obvious. Kevin Sutter wrote on 06
|
By
Bill Shannon
· #18
·
|