Date   

Re: CDI integration - decision

Arjan Tijms
 

Hi,

It's indeed a tad too late if the Proposed Final Draft is only days away.

Perhaps in the meantime individual application servers can do a little bit more to integrate with CDI out of the box, like JBoss already does today. I certainly like to see what we can do for this at Payara.

Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms



On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Guillermo González de Agüero <z06.guillermo@...> wrote:
Hi Pavel,

I understand it. We (the community) should have raised this before.

I just hope we have this issue as high priority for the next version.

Thanks for your efforts!


Regards

Guillermo González de Agüero

El mié., 7 de junio de 2017 17:17, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> escribió:

Hi Guillermo,

I really appreciate your activity around this area, but at this point, I don't think we should consider pursuing any change. We are days from Proposed Final Draft and we still don't have ready everything we HAVE TO deliver. Adding any other (non-trivial) changes like this is like sawing off the branch we’re sitting on..

Thanks and regards,
Pavel


On 06/06/2017 18:38, Guillermo González de Agüero wrote:
Hi,

I invited Antoine Sabot Durand (CDI Spec lead) to join the conversation and he replied me today that he and the Weld team will have a look at the issue as they have already been helping other spec integrate with CDI.

CDI 2.0 is already final but maybe they have some ideas that could help here going some step foward. I ask you and Santiago and the rest of the EG please to wait a little for them to comment here before taking a definitive decission.


Regards,

Guillermo González de Agüero

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> wrote:
Dear experts,

Thank you for a productive discussion about CDI integration. We now have a good understanding of what can be achieved when using the new CDI 2.0 API.

Our recent analysis has concluded that providing a better CDI integration would require more experimentation than what we can do in this minor release. We also don't want to introduce "hard" dependency on CDI API to the JAX-RS API as many JAX-RS developers rely on running JAX-RS outside of CDI context.

We agree that CDI can be used as the "glue" of the whole Java EE platform and JAX-RS can do more in terms of the CDI integration when running in a Java EE container. Currently, such enhancements are NOT forbidden at the spec level and JAX-RS providers are free to introduce support that goes beyond what JAX-RS spec mandates. Further experiment in this area can help to gather more feedback for any future re-evaluation of improved CDI/JAX-RS integration story. Also, this feedback may help CDI owners to provide public API enhancements to enable full JAX-RS /CDI integration in a portable way.

Thanks again for the discussion on the mailing list.

Best regards,
Pavel & Santiago








Re: CDI integration - decision

Guillermo González de Agüero
 

Hi Pavel,

I understand it. We (the community) should have raised this before.

I just hope we have this issue as high priority for the next version.

Thanks for your efforts!


Regards

Guillermo González de Agüero


El mié., 7 de junio de 2017 17:17, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> escribió:

Hi Guillermo,

I really appreciate your activity around this area, but at this point, I don't think we should consider pursuing any change. We are days from Proposed Final Draft and we still don't have ready everything we HAVE TO deliver. Adding any other (non-trivial) changes like this is like sawing off the branch we’re sitting on..

Thanks and regards,
Pavel


On 06/06/2017 18:38, Guillermo González de Agüero wrote:
Hi,

I invited Antoine Sabot Durand (CDI Spec lead) to join the conversation and he replied me today that he and the Weld team will have a look at the issue as they have already been helping other spec integrate with CDI.

CDI 2.0 is already final but maybe they have some ideas that could help here going some step foward. I ask you and Santiago and the rest of the EG please to wait a little for them to comment here before taking a definitive decission.


Regards,

Guillermo González de Agüero

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> wrote:
Dear experts,

Thank you for a productive discussion about CDI integration. We now have a good understanding of what can be achieved when using the new CDI 2.0 API.

Our recent analysis has concluded that providing a better CDI integration would require more experimentation than what we can do in this minor release. We also don't want to introduce "hard" dependency on CDI API to the JAX-RS API as many JAX-RS developers rely on running JAX-RS outside of CDI context.

We agree that CDI can be used as the "glue" of the whole Java EE platform and JAX-RS can do more in terms of the CDI integration when running in a Java EE container. Currently, such enhancements are NOT forbidden at the spec level and JAX-RS providers are free to introduce support that goes beyond what JAX-RS spec mandates. Further experiment in this area can help to gather more feedback for any future re-evaluation of improved CDI/JAX-RS integration story. Also, this feedback may help CDI owners to provide public API enhancements to enable full JAX-RS /CDI integration in a portable way.

Thanks again for the discussion on the mailing list.

Best regards,
Pavel & Santiago







Re: Subresource locator - return instance or class

 

Sounds reasonable. If other vendors agree to support this feature, we should add it to the spec.

 

From: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io [mailto:jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pavel Bucek
Sent: Mittwoch, 7. Juni 2017 17:29
To: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io
Subject: [jaxrs] Subresource locator - return instance or class

 

Dear experts,

we are in a stage when we are re-reading spec document and javadoc (you're welcomed to help us - if you have some favorite typo anywhere in JAX-RS and you wan't to get rid of it, now is the time to report it) and one particular thing was noticed:

specification supports only returning an instance as a subresource, thus:

@Path("sub1")
public SubResource getSubResourceLocator1() {
    return new SubResource();
}

is supported and

@Path("sub2")
public Class<SubResource> getSubResourceLocator2() {
    return SubResource.class;
}

is not.

RI currently supports both cases and I'm wondering whether we should add that into the specification.

There is obvious advantage of the latter approach, since the instance will be managed (in a correct scope) by the JAX-RS runtime and more importantly, it will be injected, so application developer don't have to inject evertyhing required in a root resource and pass injected values in a constructor of returned instance.

What do you think?

Thanks and regards,
Pavel

 

 


Subresource locator - return instance or class

Pavel Bucek
 

Dear experts,

we are in a stage when we are re-reading spec document and javadoc (you're welcomed to help us - if you have some favorite typo anywhere in JAX-RS and you wan't to get rid of it, now is the time to report it) and one particular thing was noticed:

specification supports only returning an instance as a subresource, thus:

@Path("sub1")
public SubResource getSubResourceLocator1() {
    return new SubResource();
}

is supported and

@Path("sub2")
public Class<SubResource> getSubResourceLocator2() {
    return SubResource.class;
}

is not.

RI currently supports both cases and I'm wondering whether we should add that into the specification.

There is obvious advantage of the latter approach, since the instance will be managed (in a correct scope) by the JAX-RS runtime and more importantly, it will be injected, so application developer don't have to inject evertyhing required in a root resource and pass injected values in a constructor of returned instance.

What do you think?

Thanks and regards,
Pavel




Re: CDI integration - decision

Pavel Bucek
 

Hi Guillermo,

I really appreciate your activity around this area, but at this point, I don't think we should consider pursuing any change. We are days from Proposed Final Draft and we still don't have ready everything we HAVE TO deliver. Adding any other (non-trivial) changes like this is like sawing off the branch we’re sitting on..

Thanks and regards,
Pavel


On 06/06/2017 18:38, Guillermo González de Agüero wrote:
Hi,

I invited Antoine Sabot Durand (CDI Spec lead) to join the conversation and he replied me today that he and the Weld team will have a look at the issue as they have already been helping other spec integrate with CDI.

CDI 2.0 is already final but maybe they have some ideas that could help here going some step foward. I ask you and Santiago and the rest of the EG please to wait a little for them to comment here before taking a definitive decission.


Regards,

Guillermo González de Agüero

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> wrote:
Dear experts,

Thank you for a productive discussion about CDI integration. We now have a good understanding of what can be achieved when using the new CDI 2.0 API.

Our recent analysis has concluded that providing a better CDI integration would require more experimentation than what we can do in this minor release. We also don't want to introduce "hard" dependency on CDI API to the JAX-RS API as many JAX-RS developers rely on running JAX-RS outside of CDI context.

We agree that CDI can be used as the "glue" of the whole Java EE platform and JAX-RS can do more in terms of the CDI integration when running in a Java EE container. Currently, such enhancements are NOT forbidden at the spec level and JAX-RS providers are free to introduce support that goes beyond what JAX-RS spec mandates. Further experiment in this area can help to gather more feedback for any future re-evaluation of improved CDI/JAX-RS integration story. Also, this feedback may help CDI owners to provide public API enhancements to enable full JAX-RS /CDI integration in a portable way.

Thanks again for the discussion on the mailing list.

Best regards,
Pavel & Santiago







Re: module-info or not module-info..

Pavel Bucek
 

Please see https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commit/f84db6dbb13801411560368deaac7d0d5004db65

Manifest entry "Automatic-Module-Name" was added (based on http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jpms-spec-experts/2017-May/000687.html).

Module name for JAX-RS API is "java.ws.rs". Corresponding module-info is already part of the API sources, but it is ignored when compiling on Java SE 8, which is what we use.

Please let me know if you see any issues. (sooner is better).

Regards,
Pavel



On 04/06/2017 23:11, Pavel Bucek wrote:
I'm waiting for the implementation (since I'd like to test it before the actual commit), but the problem is that I do have some experience with "breaking" changes between jdk 9 builds, so I'm not sure whether the header name is final or not :)

I guess we can ask around about this - as you say, introducing manifest entry is not a problem.

Thanks,
Pavel

On 03/06/2017 12:39, Gunnar Morling via Groups.Io wrote:
One option to consider is to add the "Automatic-Module-Name" header to the spec JAR's MANIFEST.MF.

This header entry is foreseen by JPMS (some background) to specify a module name, should a non-modularized JAR be used as an automatic module (instead of deriving a module name from the JAR file name). The change for this hasn't landed int the latest JDK 9 preview release yet (b172 at the time of writing), but once it will, we'd make use of this for Bean Validation. I don't think there's any risk of adding this header, esp. it can be done while building with Java 8.



Re: CDI integration

Santiago Pericas-Geertsen
 


On Jun 6, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Markus KARG <markus@...> wrote:

Turning on CDI by default implies that all methods have to be non-final, which is not backwards compatible to JAX-RS 2.0. So we cannot do that.
-Markus

 That's a good point, and certainly not something we can easily resolve.

 As others have mentioned, a strength of Java EE is integration with other specs like CDI, JSON-B, etc. But let us not forget that just as important is to ensure backward compatibility; adoption of newer versions of Java EE and JAX-RS depend on this compatibility not being threatened.

— Santiago

 
From: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io [mailto:jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io] On Behalf Of Ondrej Mihályi
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Juni 2017 16:27
To: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io
Subject: Re: [jaxrs] CDI integration
 
>> The only caveat is that the implementation will need to know the classes by that point, which is before ServletContainerInitializer is fired
that certainly is a problem, we do rely on servlet scanning..
Even it wouldn't be a problem, if @Path annotation isn't a bean defining annotation, the event wouldn't be fired at all in the "annotated" discovery mode if there are no other CDI beans (possible if resources only want to inject beans from other modules).

The approach of turning @Path into a stereotype is very nice and it doesn't require a runtime dependency on CDI at all. CDI API would be needed only to compile JAX-RS API because annotations not found on the classpath are ignored by the JVM, CDI impl wouldn't be needed at all. If we specify @RequestScoped in the stereotype, it would just specify what I believe all implementations do anyway -> create a resource instance per request, which is the default behavior mandated by the previous JAX-RS 2.0
It would be possible to override the scope for each class in a standard way by providing a scope annotation along with @Path.

Furthermore, if @Path is a stereotype, it would also become a bean-defining annotation and turn on CDI by default, even if there are no other CDI beans in the module, which is what most people would expect.

Ondro



Re: CDI integration - decision

Guillermo González de Agüero
 

Hi,

I invited Antoine Sabot Durand (CDI Spec lead) to join the conversation and he replied me today that he and the Weld team will have a look at the issue as they have already been helping other spec integrate with CDI.

CDI 2.0 is already final but maybe they have some ideas that could help here going some step foward. I ask you and Santiago and the rest of the EG please to wait a little for them to comment here before taking a definitive decission.


Regards,

Guillermo González de Agüero

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...> wrote:
Dear experts,

Thank you for a productive discussion about CDI integration. We now have a good understanding of what can be achieved when using the new CDI 2.0 API.

Our recent analysis has concluded that providing a better CDI integration would require more experimentation than what we can do in this minor release. We also don't want to introduce "hard" dependency on CDI API to the JAX-RS API as many JAX-RS developers rely on running JAX-RS outside of CDI context.

We agree that CDI can be used as the "glue" of the whole Java EE platform and JAX-RS can do more in terms of the CDI integration when running in a Java EE container. Currently, such enhancements are NOT forbidden at the spec level and JAX-RS providers are free to introduce support that goes beyond what JAX-RS spec mandates. Further experiment in this area can help to gather more feedback for any future re-evaluation of improved CDI/JAX-RS integration story. Also, this feedback may help CDI owners to provide public API enhancements to enable full JAX-RS /CDI integration in a portable way.

Thanks again for the discussion on the mailing list.

Best regards,
Pavel & Santiago






CDI integration - decision

Pavel Bucek
 

Dear experts,

Thank you for a productive discussion about CDI integration. We now have a good understanding of what can be achieved when using the new CDI 2.0 API.

Our recent analysis has concluded that providing a better CDI integration would require more experimentation than what we can do in this minor release. We also don't want to introduce "hard" dependency on CDI API to the JAX-RS API as many JAX-RS developers rely on running JAX-RS outside of CDI context.

We agree that CDI can be used as the "glue" of the whole Java EE platform and JAX-RS can do more in terms of the CDI integration when running in a Java EE container. Currently, such enhancements are NOT forbidden at the spec level and JAX-RS providers are free to introduce support that goes beyond what JAX-RS spec mandates. Further experiment in this area can help to gather more feedback for any future re-evaluation of improved CDI/JAX-RS integration story. Also, this feedback may help CDI owners to provide public API enhancements to enable full JAX-RS /CDI integration in a portable way.

Thanks again for the discussion on the mailing list.

Best regards,
Pavel & Santiago


Re: CDI integration

 

Turning on CDI by default implies that all methods have to be non-final, which is not backwards compatible to JAX-RS 2.0. So we cannot do that.

-Markus

 

From: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io [mailto:jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io] On Behalf Of Ondrej Mihályi
Sent: Dienstag, 6. Juni 2017 16:27
To: jaxrs-spec@javaee.groups.io
Subject: Re: [jaxrs] CDI integration

 

>> The only caveat is that the implementation will need to know the classes by that point, which is before ServletContainerInitializer is fired

that certainly is a problem, we do rely on servlet scanning..

Even it wouldn't be a problem, if @Path annotation isn't a bean defining annotation, the event wouldn't be fired at all in the "annotated" discovery mode if there are no other CDI beans (possible if resources only want to inject beans from other modules).

The approach of turning @Path into a stereotype is very nice and it doesn't require a runtime dependency on CDI at all. CDI API would be needed only to compile JAX-RS API because annotations not found on the classpath are ignored by the JVM, CDI impl wouldn't be needed at all. If we specify @RequestScoped in the stereotype, it would just specify what I believe all implementations do anyway -> create a resource instance per request, which is the default behavior mandated by the previous JAX-RS 2.0
It would be possible to override the scope for each class in a standard way by providing a scope annotation along with @Path.

Furthermore, if @Path is a stereotype, it would also become a bean-defining annotation and turn on CDI by default, even if there are no other CDI beans in the module, which is what most people would expect.

Ondro


Re: CDI integration

Ondrej Mihályi
 

I created an new issue to turn the @Path annotation into a CDI stereotype if used in a CDI container: https://github.com/jax-rs/api/issues/556


Re: CDI integration

Ondrej Mihályi
 

Regarding the dependency on CDI, I don't think that JAX-RS must depend on CDI at runtime at this stage. However, it could at least depend on @Inject from JSR 330 which should be preferred to @Context where applicable (naturally everywhere except method parameters).

Ondro


Re: CDI integration

Ondrej Mihályi
 

>> The only caveat is that the implementation will need to know the classes by that point, which is before ServletContainerInitializer is fired
that certainly is a problem, we do rely on servlet scanning..
Even it wouldn't be a problem, if @Path annotation isn't a bean defining annotation, the event wouldn't be fired at all in the "annotated" discovery mode if there are no other CDI beans (possible if resources only want to inject beans from other modules).

The approach of turning @Path into a stereotype is very nice and it doesn't require a runtime dependency on CDI at all. CDI API would be needed only to compile JAX-RS API because annotations not found on the classpath are ignored by the JVM, CDI impl wouldn't be needed at all. If we specify @RequestScoped in the stereotype, it would just specify what I believe all implementations do anyway -> create a resource instance per request, which is the default behavior mandated by the previous JAX-RS 2.0
It would be possible to override the scope for each class in a standard way by providing a scope annotation along with @Path.

Furthermore, if @Path is a stereotype, it would also become a bean-defining annotation and turn on CDI by default, even if there are no other CDI beans in the module, which is what most people would expect.

Ondro


Re: Status update

Gunnar Morling
 

Hi Pavel,

2017-06-05 11:07 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:
Hi Gunnar,

I'm sorry to say that, but I don't think that proposal is viable.

What if the app (BV layer) knows Locales L1 and L2 and the user (request)
asks for L3;q=0.9, L2;q=0.5, L1;q=0.1. In the latest version of the
proposal, L3 will be chosen - what happens when L3 is passed to BV?
The fallback mechanism of the JDK ResourceBundle API will kick in
which depends on the relationship between requested locales.

So say L3 = EN_US and L2 = EN, the ResourceBundle API automatically
will take care of that fallback and use EN if no messages for EN_US
are present. If L2 was something unrelated, e.g. FR then it'd fall
back to the default messages in whatever language defined by the user
(and in English as measure of last resort for the built-in
constraints).


Producing an error? Using a default Locale? Neither is a good behavior, L2
should be selected. I haven't seen anything in BV which would return set of
supported locales..
I thought that's where the suggested LocaleResolver SPI comes in. The
user will know in which languages they have provided validation
messages, so they could plug in an alternative LocaleResolver which
could select L2 over L3 in your example.


Also, the selected locale (whatever it is), should be made available to
JAX-RS application, so it can work with that further if needed. We don't
have anything like that now. Not to mention that the selection process might
need to be pluggable.
Isn't that what the LocalResolver SPI exactly is about?


Last but not least - we would need to define how is the selected Locale used
in whole context of JAX-RS application, which might sound easier as it is.

Best regards,
Pavel



On 05/06/2017 10:06, Gunnar Morling via Groups.Io wrote:

Hi Pavel,

Any chance for considering the latest proposal for passing the
(highest-quality) request locale to Bean Validation?

Thanks,

--Gunnar


2017-06-02 14:48 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:

Dear experts,

as you might have noticed, we dealt with several small issues in the past
couple of weeks. Notable ones:

- @Priority for providers
- JSON-B integration update
- Introduction of JSON-P integration
- HTTP PATCH support on the server (client side was just reverted)
- CompletionStage can be returned from the resource method
- Response API: AutoCloseable + Status#asEnum
- Support for new HTTP Status codes

Etc.

Complete list of closed issues:


https://github.com/jax-rs/api/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+sort%3Aupdated-desc

API commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commits/master

Spec commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/spec/commits/master

If you have any questions or suggestions about changes we've made, please
let us know.

We are going to release another API milestone build soon and it will be
most
likely last milestone before submitting Proposed Final Draft.

Thanks and regards,
Pavel






Re: Status update

Dennis Kieselhorst
 

Hi Pavel,

thank you for adding this. I filed the OCA yesterday so next time you should be able to accept my contributions.

Regards
Dennis


Re: Status update

Pavel Bucek
 

oops. :) will be fixed in the next milestone.

Thanks,
Pavel


On 06/06/2017 06:27, Christian Kaltepoth wrote:
Hey Pavel,

thanks a lot. It is great to finally see this feature in the spec.

Just one minor typo: "withing" should be "within". See:


Christian


2017-06-05 21:13 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:

please see https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commit/d18207327468870ab885120c3790e36a741af26d


On 04/06/2017 23:15, Pavel Bucek wrote:

Hi Dennis,

I can't even if I wanted to - you are not on the OCA page (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html), so I cannot accept any code contribution from you.

I'm still not sure whether we want to add these as client builder methods or as a properties and if latter, where the properties should be defined. The issue is on my list, but I cannot promise that it will be part of the next milestone build.

Regards,
Pavel


On 03/06/2017 10:22, Dennis Kieselhorst wrote:
Hi Pavel,

could you merge my PR before the next milestone release? https://github.com/jax-rs/api/pull/555

Cheers
Dennis





--


Re: Status update

 

Hey Pavel,

thanks a lot. It is great to finally see this feature in the spec.

Just one minor typo: "withing" should be "within". See:


Christian


2017-06-05 21:13 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:

please see https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commit/d18207327468870ab885120c3790e36a741af26d


On 04/06/2017 23:15, Pavel Bucek wrote:

Hi Dennis,

I can't even if I wanted to - you are not on the OCA page (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html), so I cannot accept any code contribution from you.

I'm still not sure whether we want to add these as client builder methods or as a properties and if latter, where the properties should be defined. The issue is on my list, but I cannot promise that it will be part of the next milestone build.

Regards,
Pavel


On 03/06/2017 10:22, Dennis Kieselhorst wrote:
Hi Pavel,

could you merge my PR before the next milestone release? https://github.com/jax-rs/api/pull/555

Cheers
Dennis






Re: Status update

Pavel Bucek
 

On 04/06/2017 23:15, Pavel Bucek wrote:

Hi Dennis,

I can't even if I wanted to - you are not on the OCA page (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html), so I cannot accept any code contribution from you.

I'm still not sure whether we want to add these as client builder methods or as a properties and if latter, where the properties should be defined. The issue is on my list, but I cannot promise that it will be part of the next milestone build.

Regards,
Pavel


On 03/06/2017 10:22, Dennis Kieselhorst wrote:
Hi Pavel,

could you merge my PR before the next milestone release? https://github.com/jax-rs/api/pull/555

Cheers
Dennis



Re: Status update

Pavel Bucek
 

Hi Gunnar,

I'm sorry to say that, but I don't think that proposal is viable.

What if the app (BV layer) knows Locales L1 and L2 and the user (request) asks for L3;q=0.9, L2;q=0.5, L1;q=0.1. In the latest version of the proposal, L3 will be chosen - what happens when L3 is passed to BV?

Producing an error? Using a default Locale? Neither is a good behavior, L2 should be selected. I haven't seen anything in BV which would return set of supported locales..

Also, the selected locale (whatever it is), should be made available to JAX-RS application, so it can work with that further if needed. We don't have anything like that now. Not to mention that the selection process might need to be pluggable.

Last but not least - we would need to define how is the selected Locale used in whole context of JAX-RS application, which might sound easier as it is.

Best regards,
Pavel

On 05/06/2017 10:06, Gunnar Morling via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi Pavel,

Any chance for considering the latest proposal for passing the
(highest-quality) request locale to Bean Validation?

Thanks,

--Gunnar


2017-06-02 14:48 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:
Dear experts,

as you might have noticed, we dealt with several small issues in the past
couple of weeks. Notable ones:

- @Priority for providers
- JSON-B integration update
- Introduction of JSON-P integration
- HTTP PATCH support on the server (client side was just reverted)
- CompletionStage can be returned from the resource method
- Response API: AutoCloseable + Status#asEnum
- Support for new HTTP Status codes

Etc.

Complete list of closed issues:

https://github.com/jax-rs/api/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+sort%3Aupdated-desc

API commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commits/master

Spec commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/spec/commits/master

If you have any questions or suggestions about changes we've made, please
let us know.

We are going to release another API milestone build soon and it will be most
likely last milestone before submitting Proposed Final Draft.

Thanks and regards,
Pavel




Re: Status update

Gunnar Morling
 

Hi Pavel,

Any chance for considering the latest proposal for passing the
(highest-quality) request locale to Bean Validation?

Thanks,

--Gunnar


2017-06-02 14:48 GMT+02:00 Pavel Bucek <pavel.bucek@...>:

Dear experts,

as you might have noticed, we dealt with several small issues in the past
couple of weeks. Notable ones:

- @Priority for providers
- JSON-B integration update
- Introduction of JSON-P integration
- HTTP PATCH support on the server (client side was just reverted)
- CompletionStage can be returned from the resource method
- Response API: AutoCloseable + Status#asEnum
- Support for new HTTP Status codes

Etc.

Complete list of closed issues:

https://github.com/jax-rs/api/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+sort%3Aupdated-desc

API commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/api/commits/master

Spec commits:

https://github.com/jax-rs/spec/commits/master

If you have any questions or suggestions about changes we've made, please
let us know.

We are going to release another API milestone build soon and it will be most
likely last milestone before submitting Proposed Final Draft.

Thanks and regards,
Pavel