jump to navigation

EE6 Public Draft APPROVED February 26, 2009

Posted by Sacha in JBoss.
trackback

Good news, the EE6 Public Review Draft has just been approved by the JCP Executive Committee.

Looking at the results gives some interesting information:

  • The Apache Foundation voted NO, but didn’t do so based on the merits of the specs, but because of their long-standing issue with SUN wrt the SE 6 license. While I support Apache’s decision to vote NO to any SUN-led JSR until SUN gets their act together, we didn’t take such a strong stance and will only vote NO to any future SE JSR proposal (unless the ASF gets a satisfactory proposal from Sun obviously).
  • SAP voted YES to the specification but commented that “[they] would like the Spec Lead to consider putting more emphasis on architectural rigor regarding a single consolidated and extensible component model to be used across the platform – right now there are three (EJB, JSF and JSR 299).” While I don’t think there are any problems with the current approach, I can see why SAP might want to dispatch things differently. The good thing is that SAP is part of all of those specs (EE, EJB, JSF, 299, etc.) so we are waiting for their specific advices.
  • As always, I like to keep the fun for the end. SpringSource, the Switzerland of middleware, courageously voted NO… hum, no, they voted YES, hum, no… actually they voted ABSTAIN! SpringSource always had a hard time positioning itself wrt J2EE/EE. Consequently, this is no surprise that they opted for a non-risky position where i) they don’t vote NO to EE (not good for their karma), but ii) don’t back it either. It gives them the freedom to criticize the spec when they see fit. Opportunism at its best. Last but not least, they add this comment: “We would have preferred to see a dependency injection model for SE, as we proposed in 2007.” ?!? SpringSource never contacted us for a JSR DI specification, so I am not sure what “spec” they are referring to. Maybe some back-doors discussions with other vendors. In any case, if these were back-doors discussions, they should remain so and I find it strange to use it as a public comment to justify an ABSTAIN vote. In the land of privacy, you don’t become Switzerland overnight – and I know what I am speaking about…

Also, I’d like to officially thank our colleagues at Oracle, Google and IBM for their deep involvement between December 2008 and February 2009 to make sure JSR-299 fitted to their requirements. In just a few weeks, they’ve worked with no agenda other than solving problems. Thank you.

Onward,

Sacha

Advertisements

Comments»

1. J2EE 6 - Draft - Approved « Java Hellenic User Group - February 26, 2009

[…] εδώ.Σχόλια εδώ. Το διαβάσαμε στο […]

2. Adam FitzGerald - February 26, 2009

For the record, here is the complete text of the SpringSource comment regarding EE6 review vote:

“The introduction of profiles is a step in the right direction. However, we are disappointed not to see a minimal web profile, especially as this has become the choice of most enterprise Java users.

As with previous releases, the inclusion of unproven technology is a risk, especially in JSR 299 and EJB concurrency annotations. The number of substantial changes late in the process also gives us concern about the maturity of the result–especially, the impact of the scope creep of JSR 299 on other specifications.

Experience has shown that tying dependency injection features to a server environment does not match user requirements, as injection is common to all application types. We would have preferred to see a dependency injection model for SE, as we proposed in 2007.

Finally, we are not convinced that the end result matches the goals of Java EE 6 as defined in the original specification request, which we strongly supported.”

Adam FitzGerald
SpringSource

Sacha - February 26, 2009

Thanks Adam. FYI, the complete list of all comments made by all EC members is available from my post – third hyperlink.

3. anil - February 26, 2009

even more proof that jboss is still nothing more than a bunch of crybaby wankers. always taking pot-shots anywhere they can instead of just taking the high road.

Sacha - February 26, 2009

Thanks for your comment anil, we value your feedback.

4. cdiesse - February 27, 2009

Good news !
For this run, I think jboss has been paid for his involvement, loyalty and strong support for java EE. Most java developers are waiting the first jsr-299 ri implementation from jboss and the the jsf-2.0 richfaces version.

The reference open source for Java EE 6 in top preference list are : tomcat 6, glassfish v3 and jboss 5. (Maybe Oracle AS)

Spring must align on sun or die.

My 2 cents.

Sacha - February 27, 2009

Hello cdiesse,

We have indeed invested a lot of effort and innovation in EE6 and other specs (299, JSF, EJB, etc.)

I obviously disagree with the order of your preference list. Well, maybe not so much since tomcat is included in JBoss – but with additional services which boost it on steroids 🙂

Cheers,

sacha

5. Paweł Paprota - February 27, 2009

It’s nice to see that SpringSource made a good addition to the JSR process. I need to read the spec more closely to judge to what extent they were allowed to influence the outcome.

I must say I am disappointed by Sacha’s comments towards SpringSource’s vote, I am sure they don’t have some evil ultimate domination plan neither they want to undermine JSR efforts. If only everyone could get along technically and politically speaking then it would be so much more productive world…

Sacha - February 27, 2009

Pawel,

How can you say, in the same sentence:
i) “SS made a good addition to the JSR process”, and
ii) “I need […] to judge to what extent they were allowed to influence the outcome”

What do you mean?

I am in favor of making all EE discussions be public, I think it would help the community have more leverage on where things go.

Paweł Paprota - February 27, 2009

Unfortunate wording on my part, sorry! I mean that I am curious on how SpringSource’s involvement worked out in practice. For now I can only judge it by some news items I’ve read during past several months and their vote comment that was surprisingly on merit in contrast to other, often “auto-generated” ones. Although I understand that the comment is only a small part of what JSR execs are doing 🙂

In general I would think that SpringSource had a clear “technical agenda” going into the JSR process given their background in enterprise Java product landscape. And it’s the reason I will look closer than usually at JSR process (especially such high profile ones as EE).

Sacha - February 27, 2009

OK, thanks for the clarification Pawel, it makes indeed more sense.

cheers,

sacha


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: