Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] Sanity Check - Making Core Profile a Dependency of

[Reza Rahman <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxx>]

This brief follow-up is not aimed at anyone in particular but rather a
general attempt to try to potentially better inform anyone interested in
this discussion. It is helpful to carefully read the Profiles section in
the Jakarta EE specification:
https://jakarta.ee/specifications/platform/11/jakarta-platform-spec-11.0-m5#a3212.
The reason I am familiar with this content is because I helped formulate
this as part of the Java EE 6 expert group so many years ago. I
understand this all seems pedantic to some, but this is the nature of
open specifications as opposed to just open source. The accuracy,
reliability, and integrity of what is in these documents matters.

On 3/25/2025 7:38 PM, Reza Rahman wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Today in the Jakarta EE Steering Committee meeting, I came to learn
> that a Core Profile dependency was added to the Web Profile Maven POM.
> I am unconvinced this was done through adequate deliberation and
> consensus (that is, votes to support a truly majority stakeholder
> decision). More than anything else, I want to ensure that in fact has
> happened or happens soon.
>
> Adding a Core Profile Maven dependency for Web Profile is problematic
> for the following reasons:
>
> * Strictly from a specification perspective (please read the actual
> specification to verify this), Core and Web are separate profiles
> targeted to separate domains. The Web Profile is geared to web
> applications while the Core Profile is geared towards microservices.
> Neither profile refer to each other and can freely evolve to meet the
> needs of their respective target use cases.
>
> * While from a specification perspective no such dependency actually
> exists, the Maven POM will give end users the impression that there is
> such a concrete dependency. Moreover, users will effectively have this
> dependency chain in their applications and may even come to rely on it.
>
> * If the Core and Web Profiles do evolve separately (for example by
> adding or removing APIs), this dependency chain will get in the way,
> will no longer work, or will require awkward Maven gymnastics to make
> work. All it would take is needing separate out-of-sync releases of
> these profiles for things to break.
>
> * It risks reinforcing an impression that passing the Web Profile TCK
> means also passing the Core Profile TCK. This is not the case and you
> need to in fact go through separate certifications for each profile.
>
> I think the best solution is to not introduce this dependency at all,
> get back to properly separated Core and Web profiles just as the
> actual specification reflects, and proceed with the Web Profile
> release. If this must be done and there is proper consensus, it should
> be done by updating the Web Profile specification to explicitly
> reference the Core Profile specification. The Core Profile
> specification should be updated to evidently serve as a "base" Jakarta
> EE profile in addition to serving it's currently identified domain.
>
> I understand everybody is working hard to get releases out and
> everyone has the best of intentions. However, I feel these things need
> to be carried out with the weight that Jakarta EE has in the Java
> ecosystem. I want to make sure that's actually the case. I hope that
> is understandable.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Reza
>
> P.S: I have already discussed this matter with Ed before commencing
> this communication in case you are wondering.