| Re: [microprofile-wg] Proposal: Host MicroProfile in Jakarta EE |
|
I agree +1 with MicroProfile moving to the Jakarta EE working group with some caveats. First – I think aligned with the Jakarta EE 12 timeline and a major release of Microprofile that the apis should move to the Jakarta namespace. MicroProfile
is more open to breaking changes and this will be a one off breaking change. Why – because it is simpler and if you look ahead 5 years from now if we keep the old namespace nobody coming to Jakarta EE new would understand why we have multiple namespaces in
Jakarta. Second – overall governance should be under the usual Jakarta EE governance processes to make life simpler. I agree that MicroProfile should be it’s
own Profile Spec within Jakarta and therefore can have its own Profile project, release cadence and selection of specs it wants in the profile.
Third – I think innovating in specs can occur in Jakarta EE WG as a whole and doesn’t require a MicroProfile badge. The adoption of a spec into a profile
(whether Micro, Web or Full) can signify maturity. After all MicroProfile AI actually has nothing to do with “Microservices” per se and is widely applicable to Full Profile apps.
A lot of what is proposed is aligned with a blog I put out 5 years ago
MicroProfile and Jakarta EE Technical Alignment Thanks
From: microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of John Clingan via microprofile-wg At yesterday's MicroProfile Steering Committee call, John and Emily presented "Proposal:
Host MicroProfile in Jakarta EE". Before replying to this post, please review the meeting
minutes to see what has been discussed. Please use this thread to continue the discussion. The proposal is at a high level, and some details would need to be worked out
if this proposal moves forward. |