jsr348
  1. jsr348
  2. JSR348-10

It should be mandatory to provide maintenance releases of corresponding affected specifications

    Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: General
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      One of the suffering points of the JCP and the Java EE spec in particular is the fact that when new specifications are created, or existing specifications are updated, frequently it is either not practical or not possible to make changes in other specifications in order to "solve the problem the right way."

      So in a sense, hacks are put in to the new or updating specification in order to work around these issues, when the real issue should be addressed in a different specification.

      We even see instances of this happening when two specifications are active at the same time!

      Consider CDI and JSF. The conversation scope clearly belongs as an extension to the JSF or Servlet specifications, not as a part of CDI that uses JSF. But because this was not discussed or simply to difficult to make real, we suffer from an inadequate conversation scope feature in Java EE.

      Specifications should be made to update in order to support accepted features from other specifications.

        Activity

        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        We cannot mandate that a Spec Lead invest resources and make a maintenance release - we can only encourage this (as we do.)

        Your specific comments should be addressed to the EE Spec Lead.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - We cannot mandate that a Spec Lead invest resources and make a maintenance release - we can only encourage this (as we do.) Your specific comments should be addressed to the EE Spec Lead.
        Hide
        lincolnbaxter added a comment -

        These ideas were drafted by an independent group reviewing the Early Draft from June 21, 2011 - apologies for out-of-date issues.

        Show
        lincolnbaxter added a comment - These ideas were drafted by an independent group reviewing the Early Draft from June 21, 2011 - apologies for out-of-date issues.
        Hide
        karianna added a comment -

        To add further to this - there is nothing stopping a new JSR being raised if an individual or entity feels that a maintenance release isn't forthcoming from the original JSR EG.

        Show
        karianna added a comment - To add further to this - there is nothing stopping a new JSR being raised if an individual or entity feels that a maintenance release isn't forthcoming from the original JSR EG.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        I'm closing this, since we've addressed the submitter's concern (though perhaps not to his satisfaction.)

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - I'm closing this, since we've addressed the submitter's concern (though perhaps not to his satisfaction.)

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            lincolnbaxter
          • Votes:
            2 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: