Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org
Red Hat’s view is that Jakarta EE (EE) should focus on maintaining stability and backwards compatibility as the primary usage for us is EE app modernization via microservices and cloud environment enablement. MicroProfile (MP) features are available for microservice deployment modernization which evolves more rapidly. Once a MicroProfile feature is seen to be useful, integration into an EE architecture that has been able to upgrade past the EE 9.1/EE10 incompatibilities should not see further arbitrary incompatibilities due to yet more namespace changes. EE should strive to extend MP specifications where possible to avoid unnecessary impact on users of EE and MP, and simply put, this is a good practice in specification work. The lack of agreement on rules of engagement via the CN4J alliance, along with the discussions around MP JWT leaves us to believe that competition is where the two working groups appear to be heading. Red Hat is strongly opposed to competing specification based working groups, and until the current competitive stances are resolved and clarified, Red Hat will be reducing activity and sponsorship on all matters other than the resolution of this competition/collaboration issue.

This matter needs to be taken up by both working group steering committees.


On Dec 9, 2022 at 4:45:57 AM, Vano Beridze <vanuatoo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,

I think strategic decision needs to be made on Jakarta EE side to either rely on MicroProfile specs or start creating what's missing like it was done in Jakarta Config example 

BR,
Vano

On Thu, Dec 8, 2022, 11:09 PM Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Well Core Profile is not a parent of Jakarta EE it is a profile within Jakarta EE and could be a separate project to this one. Which I think is a good option.

 

As MicroProfile WG is separate to Jakarta EE I think it’s future is a decision for that Working Group rather than the Jakarta EE platform project ;-)

 

Steve

 

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of arjan tijms
Sent: 08 December 2022 19:01
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

Hi,

On Thursday, December 8, 2022, Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

Well Payara has a full set of independent implementations of MicroProfile specifications so SmallRye is not the one and only implementation.

 

Obviously, I even implemented one of those for Payara ;)

 

It’s just that the current status quo of MicroProfile is a bit murky IMHO. There's hierarchically speaking the core profile that's a parent of both MP and EE, but still we don't want it to be really a parent project I guess.

 

Then there's the idea that MP is the modern replacement of Java EE; code first, innovative, fast moving, and with equal representation by many vendors. But in practice that's not really the case either, is it?

 

MP relatively quickly absorbed the APIs that were already planned for the ill-fated Java EE 7 Cloud theme, and then again proposed for Java EE 8 just before it all went down. But since then innovation has slowed down considerably. With Jakarta EE now fully transferred, there's no need anymore for a modern replacement of Java EE, and there's also no need to have a separate WG in order to be code first, innovative, fast moving and having equal representation by many vendors. Jakarta EE has all that too.

 

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Steve Millidge 

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of arjan tijms
Sent: 08 December 2022 15:58
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

Hi,

 

On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 7:14 AM Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Perhaps MicroProfile needs to revert back to an open source project external to the Eclipse Foundation

 

What do you mean exactly by that? You mean giving up the API/multiple-vendor split, and just move everything to Red Hat/Quarkus? E.g. making Small Rye the one and only implementation?

 

Maybe that would not be such a bad idea at all. SmallRye would then essentially be a set of Jakarta EE extension libraries like e.g. DeltaSpike, OmniFaces, PrimeFaces, etc. Maybe this is also more in-line with the reality of how things have progressed as well.

 

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech 

 

* Enterprise development, front and back. Listen to Stackd Podcast.

* Speak at conferences? Check out SpeakerTrax.

 

 

On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 6:25 AM reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This is generally the feedback we get from customers, old and new to the space. Truth be told, the Jakarta EE/MicroProfile segmentation is already cause for a lot of confusion. Core Profile is an obvious need in evolving the space. There is also no harm in having faster Core Profile only releases and independent specification releases. It’s best to not further segment unless there is truly a compelling need (which I currently honestly do not see). If anything, a path towards gradual brand convergence would be best (though that is clearly not pragmatic right now).

 

I understand some folks believe Jakarta EE has a brand perception issue. I tend to think it’s an issue that can be mitigated through consistent delivery, jettisoning truly damaged brands like EJB, serious innovation in implementations beyond the specifications as well as persistent, high quality marketing/advocacy.

 

At any rate, my main point is that maybe we should focus on delivering more high quality releases right now instead of more restructuring/reshuffling/renaming/regrouping that’s likely to get in the way of delivery and add to an already very confusing landscape that maybe actually helps no one.

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Vedran Smid <vedransmid@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 4:52 AM
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

Hi, 

 

To an outsider and an end user all this sounds very confusing. Too much of everything usually makes management harder.

Perhaps it is better not to mix MP and Jakarta. Keep MP what it is, an independent(aside APIs of course) extension to Jakarta. 

 

On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 10:40, Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I would say another Working Group is a bad idea as it is another load of bureaucracy, charter, committee and fees. A separate project under Jakarta EE makes more sense to me i.e. splitting the current platform project.

 

Steve

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Rudy De Busscher <rdebusscher@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 8:38:35 AM
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

I really like the idea of a separate entity/working group for core profile.

 

That would also solve the ambiguity around CDI lite that exists today, and a separation of the CDI specs which is really needed. Since CDI lite is not a separate spec, nor has a separate API (which means you have one API where some classes/methods that don't need to be supported in the runtime) which will lead to confusion, exceptions during runtime (since methods might not be implemented), etc ...
I means we can also remove _expression_ language from the profile since that is only required for CDI full (not supported for CDI lite)

Rudy

 

On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 at 18:25, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

 

Sorry I missed the call today, but that diagram/idea for Core Profile would sound about right leaving aside the Core Profile now includes „CDI Light“.

 

Kind Regards,

Werner Keil

 

Von: arjan tijms
Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. November 2022 18:09
An: jakartaee-platform developer discussions
Betreff: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

Hi,

 

During the platform call we very briefly touched on the core profile being the intersection between Jakarta EE and MicroProfile, but since it's part of Jakarta EE that relation is somewhat unclear.

 

We had on the table at one point a discussion of making "core profile" (we didn't have the name back then) its own top level working group (org/entity):

 

 

Maybe we can revisit this idea again.

 

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

Back to the top