The Jakarta EE name has been out for about a month, and even if Mike Milinkovich explained the names and concepts pretty well in his blog post And the Name Is…, there still is a bit confusion about how it all relates and I get questions around it whenever the topic comes up. I have tried to sum up some of it here. Hope it helps!
Java EE, or Java™ Platform, Enterprise Edition, is the name of the current platform governed by the Java Community Process (JCP). The latest version is Java EE 8, which was released in September 2017.
Eclipse Enterprise for Java (EE4J) is the top level project in the Eclipse Foundation for all the projects for creating the standards that will form the base for Jakarta EE. The EE4J Project Management Committee (PMC) is responsible for maintaining the overall vision for the top level project. It will set the standards and requirements for releases and help the projects communicate and cooperate.
Jakarta EE does not replace Java EE! It is the name for the platform evolving with Java EE 8 as a starting point. Java EE 8 will still exist, but there will not be any new versions of the platform.
Jakarta EE does not replace EE4J! It is the name of the platform based on the EE4J projects with Java EE 8 as a starting point.
I could probably write a long post about why my vote goes to Jakarta EE in the vote for new brand name to take over after Java EE, but it feels much more appropriate to refer to David Blevin‘s excellent description of the process in his blog post Java EE to Jakarta EE.
It has been tough on us keeping these discussions secret since we are all working for an open community and want to share everything. But the importance of securing a name that we as a community can trademark through the Eclipse Foundation makes it well worth the efforts.
2017 was an amazing year for me with a lot of speaking engagements at conferences in four different continents!
Per Lilja joined me in leading Javaforum Malmö and we managed to meet out target of four meetups each year. We are always looking for speakers, so don’t hesitate contact us if you want to present at one of our meetups.
Toward the end of the year, the EE4J PMC started up the work. The most pressing issue right now is to find a brand name to replace Java EE. Hopefully, this will be finalized in near future.
Last year when waiting for my flight home from JavaOne, I blogged Possible Ways forward for MVC 1.0. Now, I am sitting here at SFO again writing a follow-up on that article.
As we all now, the JSR was was transferred to me from Oracle to be completed as a standalone JSR. Since then, Christian Kaltepoth has joined me as specification lead. We never did anything about the actual IP, all in full agreement. After all, we are developers and not lawyers and just wanted to get going with the actual work.
It has never been my intention to capitalize on the IP, and I wanted to figure out a way to donate it all back to the community. As those of you who follow the EE4J Community Mailing List probably noticed, I announced the intention to transfer MVC 1.0 to Eclipse Foundation. Read the announcement here:
This does not imply any changes to the current specification work, expert group or time plan. There may be some practical changes, such as a new mailing list and moving the repositories under the Eclipse GitHub Organization, but that is way in the future.
So why Eclipse and not Apache?
Well, it makes sense to follow the other Java EE technologies when they are transferred to the EE4J umbrella project in Eclipse Foundation. MVC would be a natural fit there, but the exact details will be handled by the EE4J PMC.
Usually, you would expect 10 to follow after 9. But in the world of Java™, things move a little faster. Or at least it will be if the proposed release model in Mark Reinhold’s blog post Moving Java Forward Faster is adopted.
The next version of Java™ will then be versioned as 18.3 and be delivered as soon as March 2018. Then we will get version 18.9 in September, and so on.
In my opinion, this is pretty cool. Having a time-based release cycle for Java™ allows for developers to get smaller features delivered faster without the need to wait for the bigger, more time consuming, features to be completed.
I am convinced this proposal will be discussed and commented a lot in the community, so be sure to follow the #javatrain hashtag on Twitter.
JavaOne is only one month away and it is time to get out of that chair and start moving! That means that JavaOneStreak is on again for the fourth time in a row. The JavaOneStreak initiative was originally started by Arun Gupta back in 2014.
Do some kind of physical activity each day during the month* before JavaOne, log it and share with the hashtag #JavaOneStreak.
You don’t even have to go to JavaOne, but tell us if you are so we can meet up and brag about our achievements.
*Of course you don’t have to limit it to a month. Try to follow Heinz’ example and run a mile every day year long.
I just came off a phone call where Oracle were briefing community members about their announcement to open up Java EE. The process has just started and, understandably, there are currently more questions than answers.
Oracle finds Java EE to be very successful
Millions of applications are using Java EE
Oracle plans to continue support of Java EE
Java EE 8 will be completed as planned
Java EE 8 will also be certified on Java SE 9
By stepping aside and relicensing the technologies to an open source foundation, Oracle hope to address the perception about the openness, agility and flexibility of the current process. What this will actually mean to the Java Community Process (JCP) is uncertain. It will at least have to go through some reform to accommodate the new licensing terms.
One thing to note here, and something that is a really big thumbs up to Oracle, is that they are now informing and including the community and key players in the process from the start.
Anyone who followed the discussions and comments about JSR 376 – Java™ Platform Module System, aka Jigsaw, the last couple of weeks, should not be very surprised by the result of the Public Review Ballot. As you can see below, 13 out of 23 EC Member voted no and 10 voted yes.
Please see the Ballot Result Page for details. Make sure you read comments in the vote log to understand the reasoning for the votes. Summarized, the two following comments seems to be trending:
The specification was not ready to move on as it was submitted
The discussions and progress during the 14 day ballot period shows that it is going in the right direction
Is this a bad think for Java™ 9?
I don’t think so. This is just an example that the process is working and that the JCP fulfills its role of ensuring the quality of Java™.
Will Java™ 9 be delayed by this?
Not necessarily. It gives the Expert Group an additional 30 days to respond to the comments from the EC before submitting for a Reconsideration Ballot. The actual release date is nothing that is controlled by the JCP.