Mark,
I am not sure I understand your point completely. Let me try to explain what I think your comments are. In my approach (MicroProfile approach), we have this dependency demonstrated already. For example, MP Rest Client depends on JAX-RS, CDI etc. If Rest Client requires CDI to be updated, we will create jakarta CDI 1.0. Rest Client will depends on jakarta CDI 1.0, which then depends on CDI.
Another advantage with my suggestion (MP approach) is that:
No more time spending on packaging renaming, rerunning tcks, etc. Either big bang or incremental approach will need to rename packages first. For Big Bang, it will need at least some months to get all APIs renamed including the dormant ones. This will further delay spec updates. We have spent good effort for the massive move already. It is time to develop the specs not spending more time to do the renaming.
For MP approach, we can start new spec update now. We can propose new CDI updates to EFSP (Eclipse Foundation Spec Process) and create a new repo for the new changes. No op for renaming, no op for existing apps, no op for runtime. Time to move on...
Thanks
Emily