This morning I didn’t see any blogs talking about it, so I thought I should say something. As a JCP member I receive a newsletter with some news of the JCP. One of them is that the jcp.org web site has changed. So here are the novelties : The new site is more efficient, enables personalized content, and enhances participation, communication, and transparency. The url is the same, but the site has many new features including personalization, discussion boards and wikis. For a user point of view, the main difference is the skin. The menus to look for a JSR are the same. But as a member things have improved. Another signal from the JCP to add more collaboration to their process.
Just a quick news. For those of you who have followed the entire debate between JCDI (Java Context & Dependency Injection, aka Web Beans) and @Inject, you will be pleased (or not) to know that there is a brand new JSR : JSR 330 Dependency Injection for Java. I hope we are not starting a new battle like the one between Java Module (JSR 277), Modularity Support (JSR 294) and OSGi. Future will tell.
Jazoon, the international conference on Java technology, will be held in Zurich from the 22nd to the 25th of June. For four days you will have the chance to go to many technical presentations, with good speakers and also plenty of BOFs. I‘ve sumitted a talk on Java EE 6 and I‘ve also submitted a BOF on the same topic. The BOF is called Why should I care about Java EE 6 ? The idea is to meet informally with expert members or spec leads around Java EE 6 (EJB, JPA, JAX-RS, JAX-WS…). Developer, architects, project leaders who wantsto know more about Java EE 6 could come and share their questions and comments with Java EE 6 experts. To hold this BOF, I‘m looking for other expert members or spec leads who will be at Jazoon. If you are interested, drop me an email so we can try to make this BOF happen.
This year I‘ve talked a lot about opening up the JCP. I first did a round table at QCon with Rod Johnson and Patrick Curran (chair of the JCP) back in February. Then at Java One (with the same folks) and in May Patrick Curran came to the Paris JUG … and now a BOF at Devoxx with Corina Ulescu about this sensible topic. The questions are always the same : should the JCP be more open, and how ? To the first question, I think that most of the people agree. Yes, the JCP should be a more transparent organization. But to which extent should we open it ? And if we find a solution, do we have to formalize it and impose it (that means changing the JCP process). Basically, a spec lead can decide of the tools he/she wants to use. If he/she wants a public mailing list, that‘s fine, if not, that‘s fine too. The JCP does not impose a spec lead a way of communicating. So, at the moment, there‘s a bit of everything : closed JSRs (no wiki, no public mailing list…), opened ones (open source reference implementation, open mailing list…), and anything in between. But which model to choose ? I have to say, I‘m between two waters here. I‘m expert member on JSR-316 (Java EE 6), JSR-317 (JPA 2.0) and JSR-318 (EJB 3.1), that‘s a lot of work. Every day I receive […]