Re: [microprofile-wg] Proposal: Host MicroProfile in Jakarta EE

[Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx>]

A problem with consolidating the MP specs into existing Jakarta specs
is the loss of committer rights. MP had a flat committer model where a
committer was  committer to any MP spec and CI environment. Jakarta
spec projects have distinct committers and associated CI environments.
MP participants who are interested in an MP spec being folded into a
Jakarta spec should be put up for committer nomination in the Jakarta
spec.

On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 7:54 AM Emily Jiang via microprofile-wg
<microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 11:17 PM Reza Rahman via microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> This is a follow-up to today's MicroProfile Community Call. In addition to the important points stated the email I am responding to, Microsoft would like to add the following discussion points.
>>
>> * As part of the process of moving MicroProfile to Jakarta EE, we would be very supportive of concrete recommendations for improving the vendor neutrality and openness of the Jakarta EE Working Group. For example, it is sensible to tentatively open the Jakarta EE Steering, Marketing, and Specification Committees to all observers as long as it does not prove to be too disruptive for decision makers with binding votes. Similarly, we would welcome a proposal to add one more voting Participant Member seat to the Steering Committee. Today eligible JUGs may join as Participant Members for free: https://www.eclipse.org/org/workinggroups/jakarta_ee_charter.php. Indeed, LJC is actually the elected Participant Member in the Steering Committee today: https://jakarta.ee/committees/steering/.
>>
>> * It is important to properly evaluate if a small number of MicroProfile specifications should actually be incorporated as sub-specs of existing Jakarta EE specifications as opposed to net new specifications under Jakarta EE outright. For example, it may actually make the best sense to incorporate Rest Client into Jakarta REST and JWT Authentication into Jakarta Security. There is certainly some precedent for this. JPA was a sub-spec of EJB for a time. Similarly, Interceptors was essentially a sub-spec of CDI.  The incorporated APIs into a sub-spec could still retain the jakarta.microprofile.* namespace to maintain some reasonable level of branding continuity.
>
> My suggestion is to move as it is to keep the trace record. As for the consolidation etc, it can happen afterwards.
> Thanks,
> Emily
>>
>> We understand a resolution will be tabled by IBM/Red Hat for vote by the MicroProfile Working Group as early as next week. We hope the resolution will take into account the input from Microsoft so far and we will very much look forward to strongly supporting it.
>>
>> On 3/19/2025 5:19 PM, Reza Rahman wrote:
>>
>> This is a great direction and it is an easy +1 from Microsoft.
>>
>> In terms of naming, things like Jakarta Health is a lot less of a mouthful than Jakarta MicroProfile Health. We do believe maintaining the MicroProfile brand and differentiation is important and valuable. For example, the resulting new Jakarta Profile could be called "Micro Profile". Similarly, associated sensible package names that would be clear to the community and customers could be: jakarta.microprofile.*. Unfortunately things like org.microprofile.* inside Jakarta EE may prove to be too confusing as it implies a separate domain.
>>
>> From a Microsoft standpoint, we will do whatever we sensibly can to ensure this is not seen as a zero sum outcome dynamic for anyone and only a net gain for all.
>>
>> On 3/19/2025 4:37 PM, John Clingan via microprofile-wg wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> However, for the proposal to move forward, we would need to have a vote.  We are not there yet because the details matter.
>>
>> Let's discuss the details in this thread, which is dual-posted to the Google Group and the MicroProfile Working Group email alias.
>>
>> For those that attended the meeting, please review the minutes for accuracy.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> microprofile-wg mailing list
>> microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> microprofile-wg mailing list
>> microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
>
> _______________________________________________
> microprofile-wg mailing list
> microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg