|
Java EE 8 dependency JTA issue on modulepath
Hi, Doing some testing with Java modules, I found the Java EE 8 API has a splitted package problem on JTA. This was fixed on a JTA MR but it was done after Java EE 8 went final [1]. This is only a pro
Hi, Doing some testing with Java modules, I found the Java EE 8 API has a splitted package problem on JTA. This was fixed on a JTA MR but it was done after Java EE 8 went final [1]. This is only a pro
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #85
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
I hope we have a chance to decide ;)
I hope we have a chance to decide ;)
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #64
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
I can imagine the answer, but is there a possibility that we could provide a pull request for this now? Regards, Guillermo González de Agüero
I can imagine the answer, but is there a possibility that we could provide a pull request for this now? Regards, Guillermo González de Agüero
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #63
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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 a
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 a
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #57
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
Excuse me all for flooding. The JSF dependency I was seeing is Mojarra implementation, which I don't think belongs there: <dependency> <groupId>org.glassfish</groupId> <artifactId>javax.faces</artifac
Excuse me all for flooding. The JSF dependency I was seeing is Mojarra implementation, which I don't think belongs there: <dependency> <groupId>org.glassfish</groupId> <artifactId>javax.faces</artifac
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #55
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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 al
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 al
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #54
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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
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
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #53
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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 final. Regar
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 final. Regar
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #51
·
|
|
Request for Maven Java EE 8 artifact
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
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
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #49
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
Hi Jens, As I read it, it just means that application servers won't need to provide remote EJBs based on RMI-IIOP starting from Java EE 8. Remote EJBs will still have the same features, although vendo
Hi Jens, As I read it, it just means that application servers won't need to provide remote EJBs based on RMI-IIOP starting from Java EE 8. Remote EJBs will still have the same features, although vendo
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #39
·
|
|
RMI-IIOP proposed optional
Reading it a bit more thoroughly, "Proposed Optional" just means that a future Java EE version could make it optional. It will still be required to work on Java EE 8, but the EG can make it definitely
Reading it a bit more thoroughly, "Proposed Optional" just means that a future Java EE version could make it optional. It will still be required to work on Java EE 8, but the EG can make it definitely
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #38
·
|
|
Java EE tutorial sources
Hi, The new Java EE site states the tutorial sources have been archived [1]. Github really simplifies contributions over the old java.net site, and I the tutorial is a very valuable piece of the Java
Hi, The new Java EE site states the tutorial sources have been archived [1]. Github really simplifies contributions over the old java.net site, and I the tutorial is a very valuable piece of the Java
|
By
Guillermo González de Agüero
· #8
·
|