> EJB is a good example of WHY we don't need another extension.
> The internal manifest could and should tell you all about the jar.
> The jar should just be a nice collection of things, the manifest tells you
> what it is, EJB, MP3 whatever.
>
> I thought the paradigm was set by EJB, jar manifests.
The example set by EJB wasn't necessarily valid. In further review a few
things have been decided by our head architects (our internal technical
review folks) -- jar files aren't generic archives, they are for
classes. It was a mistake to put the source code in the 1.2 JDK into a
file called src.jar. It should have been called src.zip or some such.
Also, EJB's should have been packaged all along in a package that didn't
end in a .jar extension. That these two items in particular made it out
was an oversight -- and we are moving away from this.
So no, EJB is not a good example of why extensions aren't required. If a
user, not a program, but a user, has to open up the jar file and peek
inside to see what it is, then the system is not intuitive.
Also, once again, this is not a list for debating what we are going to
do in the servlet spec. If you have specific feedback, send it to
`[EMAIL PROTECTED]` -- you won't get a response (most
likely) but we do read it and log it -- the JCP is an audited process.
.duncan
--
James Davidson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://java.sun.com/products/servlet
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.x180.com
!try; do() PGP:0x7D776205
___________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff SERVLET-INTEREST".
Archives: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/servlet-interest.html
Resources: http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/external-resources.html
LISTSERV Help: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/user/user.html
