Adding missing/new Spec APIs

[Raymond Auge <ra...@liferay.com>]

Hey all,

I want to make sure I understand Geronimo's rational w.r.t. the Specs
sub-project going forward in the face of Jakarta EE and in particular on
the change in licensing, and also on the openness of the process.

I suppose what I'm trying to accomplish in the long run is to make sure it
is not required to fork the original specs because they just work as
expected for everyone (plain classpath, JPMS, AND OSGi).

I want to make sure that I put my efforts in the right place.

Thoughts?
-- 
*Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
 (@rotty3000)
Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
 (@Liferay)
Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)

Re: Adding missing/new Spec APIs

[Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>]

Hi Raymond

We still change some default provider and cache impl details so still makes
sense to have them (all for consistency) here

Le ven. 2 nov. 2018 14:51, Raymond Auge <ra...@liferay.com> a écrit :

> Hey all,
>
> I want to make sure I understand Geronimo's rational w.r.t. the Specs
> sub-project going forward in the face of Jakarta EE and in particular on
> the change in licensing, and also on the openness of the process.
>
> I suppose what I'm trying to accomplish in the long run is to make sure it
> is not required to fork the original specs because they just work as
> expected for everyone (plain classpath, JPMS, AND OSGi).
>
> I want to make sure that I put my efforts in the right place.
>
> Thoughts?
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>  (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>  (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
> (@OSGiAlliance)
>