Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

["reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx" <reza_rahman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Microsoft believes there is sufficient common ground across the working groups as they stand today to have sensible and mutually beneficial outcomes for the broader ecosystem, driven through collaboration. Large parts of the Java ecosystem depend on the long term health and well being of these technologies (certainly Jakarta EE).

A unified working group could make sense for these very closely linked technologies but likely isn’t an urgent priority. Other than JWT and configuration, there need not be sufficient areas of overlap going forward. These relatively small areas of overlap should be amicably workable without too many overly dramatic changes in direction.

 

---

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of arjan tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2022 2:40 PM
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Core profile as its own top level org

 

Hi,

On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 4:30 PM Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Red Hat is strongly opposed to competing specification based working groups

Would it not be a workaround then to not have the competing spec based working group, and have just one? I know it's the opposite of what this thread started with, but it could be another outcome.

I'm well aware not everyone agrees with my point of view, but the way I see it the logical structure is either having Core Profile as its own WG with EE and MP being Sub-WGs (not necessarily fully independent WGs), or alternatively just one WG managing Core Profile, Web Profile, MicroProfile and the Platform.

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms