| This is a response to Roberto’s comment on the vote thread:
---
On May 13, 2025, at 9:50 AM, Roberto Cortez via microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1 (Red Hat) on keeping the namespace:
- A namespace is mostly a technical detail (these days mostly hidden by modern IDE’s). While there was a very good reason for the javax -> jakarta move (with all the pain that brought), a simple “alignment” justification is not enough to go through that pain again (to a lesser extent) - MP Config may be deprecated in a new Jakarta Config spec, MP REST Client may merge with Jakarta REST, JWT may merge with Jakarta Security. There is no added benefit in rushing any namespace change without discussing what is going to happen with each MP API (if they are going to continue standalone or merged into another Jakarta spec). In the event of a merge between two APIs, we agree on a namespace change. Standalone specifications should stay as is.
This is a good point I had not thought of that I think deserves more discussion. I am thinking this should be a straw poll in-and-of itself. While this would be a non-binding poll, it does give a sense of expectations with how some specifications will evolve within Jakarta. - We do support a release in the Jakarta GAV with relocation to the MP GAV. This should alleviate some of the initial concerns regarding consistency and alignment.
Cheers, Roberto
—
On May 2, 2025, at 12:13 PM, John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
At this week's Live Hangout, we continued to discuss the MicroProfile->Jakarta EE Proposal. To keep the eventual resolution "simple", the idea is to come to agreement "out of band" and "ahead of time", where possible. That way, we have a better idea of what the resolution encapsulates. We are going to discuss these items on the microprofile-wg email alias, followed by non-binding straw polls. These are areas where we currently do not have agreement. Many of the MicroProfile Working Group members are also Jakarta EE Working Group members. Not all Jakarta EE Working Group members are MicroProfile Working Group Members, but I'd like to encourage them to participate in this discussion. The first topic is the MicroProfile namespace for existing MicroProfile specifications, which is currently org.eclipse.microprofile. This is arguably the most impactful discussion because it could result in a breaking change for developers and our customers. The question is whether or not this namespace remains if the MicroProfile->Jakarta EE resolution passes. I have seen a few options discussed so far:
1) Keep org.eclipse.microprofile
2) Change the namespace to jakarta.*
3) Change the namespace to jakarta.microprofile.*
I'd like to give a couple days of open discussion before opening up a separate straw poll email thread. Please respond to this thread discussing benefits and concerns. Thanks!
|
