www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felipe Leme <felip...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: EJB3 vote
Date Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:19:54 GMT
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> Can't we get them to call them EJB3-part1 and EJB3-part2 and give  them 
> separate JSR numbers?  

Unfortunately, it's not that simple and definitively not possible for 
this JSR. I think there's been some murmurings about that possibiblity 
when the JDO and EJB JSRs joined forces some time ago (see 
http://java.sun.com/j2ee/letter/persistence.html) and they decided to 
create such separated JSR in the future, but I can't tell you for sure

>I think this is a really bad precedent  for the 
> JCP to set.  Maybe we can get the EC to make an official  "never again" 
> statement :)

What exactly do you mean by  'bad precedent', the fact that 1 JSR 
creates 2 specs or the TCK issue? If you meant the former, there is 
already a precedent: the JSR-245 defines the JSP 2.1 and the javax.el 
specs.


-- Felipe

Mime
View raw message