[JSR-354] Re: Scope Discussions about JSR 354
- From: Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@...>
- To: jcurrency_mail@...
- Subject: [JSR-354] Re: Scope Discussions about JSR 354
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:58:20 +0000
On 29 January 2013 14:36, Werner Keil <werner.keil@...> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Anatole Tresch <atsticks@...> wrote:
>> I think there are two main visions: defining all by interfaces and provide
>> some arbitrary RI implementation, or define strong value types and add
>> functionality around it as required. The concept of strong immutable value
>> types for the SE environment makes sense and must be considered. But
>> generally I do not think that these two concepts must not be seen
>> exclusively. This also gives us time to check back things with some
>> representative architect from Oracle what must be considered effectively
>> (@Stephen: would you create the contact or should I go via PMO or OpenJDK
>> core mailing list ? ).
> Brian Goetz suggested the OpenJDK i18n team and mailing list. Unless Stephen
> has other contacts (Date/Time also is related to i18n or at least
> locale-dependent in most cases) the i18n team page might be best.
> Brian said, a JEP or (believe that usually follows a JEP @Stephen, what was
> the order for the 310 project?) sub-project may be proposed at any time,
> regardless of its target JDK version the teams and Oracle may decide upon
> when the time comes.
No one at Oracle wants to hear about this JSR right now. They are all
working very heavily on JDK 1.8. Wait a month or so and things will be
easier. JEPs vs JSR and similar process issues are generally not that
important. They will naturaly happen whenever needed.