Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] Fork Eclipse MicroProfile Configuration as Jakarta Configuration.

I put it on the agenda of today's Spec Committee call (not as an April Fool's Joke ;-D) 

Let's see what others think why it could be necessary and how vendors might cope that use MP right now?

As per definition it won't be relevant before Jakarta EE 10 anyway, but if such a spec had to be created or "graduated" from MP it should be done sooner.


On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 4:49 PM Heiko W. Rupp <hrupp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 1 Apr 2020, at 16:34, Otavio Santana wrote:

> My question is: Does it make sense if we create a fork of Eclipse
> MicroProfile Configuration as Jakarta Configuration?

That is a nice Aprils fool of you :-)

> The project seems stable and it will valuable to several projects such
> as JPA, JMS, and NoSQL.

Is(n't) the main obstacle of just including it that MicroProfile does
not have the IP
protection has, as it does not use the Eclipse Spec Process? If so, I
guess just
waiting on that Process to be used may be as good/quick as a fork and
prevent the two from drifting apart. Or that contributors have to
submit changes to two projects.

But I am sure I am missing some things


_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top