Hi The small notes on that are:
- rare impl actually do (asf ones but also other vendors), it is always a compromise between users/customers/consumers and specs - there is always a blurry line on some defaults (trivial example is default impl or provider impl even when defined in spec) - another blurry line is for libs vs distros So overall we are still free to choose in most cases even if we should tend to what you described. Side note: I dont want to emphasize the disrespect of that rule but the fact *we* must choose at the end. Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 03:20, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On May 24, 2022, at 6:14 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > You could have flags that enabled non-compliant behavior, but they would > have to be off by default and require user action to turn them on. > > To be clear I could have used a better word than "flags." You can have > any means you like to enable non-compliant behavior such as annotations, > alternate jars, etc. Anything that must be done explicitly by a user to > put themselves knowingly in a non-compliant state. > > > -David > >
