|Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Transitioning Jakarta EE to the jakarta namespace|
Great to hear from you!
> On May 6, 2019, at 7:22 PM, Hildeberto MendonÃa <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A way to add value is not increasing the maintenance cost and preserving backwards compatibility. I'm afraid Proposal 1 would break these two values.
> I would prefer Proposal 2 if jakarta worked as a wrapper around javax, preserving the same interfaces, reusing what is already there and innovating on the wrapper side.
Both proposals involve what you would call "a wrapper" and have the same basic backwards compatibility challenge of having to figure out how to make old apps run.
The primary place they differ is:
Â- do we break compatibility bit by bit over time in an as-needed basis
Â- do we break compatibility in one shot and get it over with
The primary question here is as a user how do you want to deal with migrating and potential compatibility issues:
Â- bit by bit over time
Â- in one shot
Knowing neither path frees you from having to absorb a backwards incompatible change and the solutions would be the same, which timeline is your preferred?
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit