Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[] Results! - Jakarta EE/MicroProfile Alignment Survey


We closed the Jakarta EE/MicroProfile alignment survey and now have the results. Just as some of the earlier surveys have indicated, a fairly strong majority of developers want some MicroProfile specifications to move to Jakarta EE including the namespace. This is congruent with the official Jakarta EE Ambassadors joint position (to be published soon).

* Move MicroProfile specifications to Jakarta EE without changing namespaces. - 19.55%
* Move MicroProfile specifications to Jakarta EE including the namespace. - 57.73%
* Reference MicroProfile specifications in Jakarta EE and not move MicroProfile specifications. - 13.64%
* Create Jakarta EE versions of MicroProfile specifications. - 9.09%

Many people entered comments and frankly each one of them is invaluable. I cannot do everyone justice but the following is a decent sampling representing the majority opinion.

"MicroProfile should evolve APIs that eventually get absorbed by Jakarta EE. MicroProfile applications should eventually be able to run
with pure Jakarta EE APIs."

"Moving MicroProfile specs into Jakarta EE including namespace will make clear where the longer term specs are maintained. Also, for
MicroProfile users it's a very easy migration path."

"I think no matter which of these options is chosen there is going to be an effect on either end users, or developers. Therefore, I
would rather make the large upfront breaking changes all at once and merge the two into the same namespace. Then, have consistency going forward."

"I would see the movement from org.eclipse.microprofile to the jakarta namespace as a sign of maturity (and success) for MicroProfile."

"Option A2 has fewer cons and is more end user friendly."

"Using a different namespace makes it clear what version and expectations (e.g. backward compatibility) the user is making. Moving without a
namespace is confusing."

"The aim of a specification should always be to make something as simple and clear as possible. The entry barriers and opportunities for error for
new and inexperienced developers must be as low as possible. An inconsistent namespace or even the possibility of circular dependencies make the
use simply too complicated and difficult. At the end of the day, it's all about the economic and productive development of applications."

"Move some MicroProfile specifications (e.g. MP Config when its stable) to Jakarta EE including the namespace."

I really hope this helps pave the way for sensible decisions. For me, gathering input and listening to people that won't necessarily send emails here is extremely important.

I will leave it to the discretion of the Eclipse Foundation if the raw results should be shared publicly. Personally I plan to write a brief blog entry to add my take on the results.

Reza Rahman
Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Blogger, Speaker

Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.

Back to the top