|Re: [microprofile-wg] [Discussion] Context Propagation 1.3 Specification Release Review - VOTE by November 26th - (two weeks)
Good callout. I think we've missed Plan Reviews in general:
We definitely need to do those from now on.
More good questions. I see that we did update the namespaces in the TCK.
I'd be hesitant to establish a rule where major changes in the TCK need to result in a major version change. That said, we're not talking strictly about changes in the TCK (say moving from Junit to TestNG) that do not have an impact on the server itself. The change in the TCK does require a change in the server and that creates some ambiguity in my mind.
Here are some potential resolutions that seem to make sense to me:
- Keep the minor version change and:
- be ok to accept CCRs from Jakarta EE 8 based impls that have used bytecode tools to modify the CP 1.3 TCK itself back to the 'javax' namespace OR
- issue our own javax version of the CP 1.3 TCK, which Jakarta EE 8 based impls can chose as an alternate to the jakarta namespace CP 1.3 TCK
- Update the major version
Any other options people see?
Back to the top