Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rest-dev] [External] : Re: EE11 Platform call update
  • From: Santiago Pericasgeertsen <santiago.pericasgeertsen@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:11:47 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; 1; spf=pass; dmarc=pass action=none; dkim=pass; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=LGBpuVPMm/BJVri+QWHBiGPbt4wRoo6LTp3zckpa85Q=; b=i4CjF/t0e+FLKhQkXr9Vc4VC3lgy3ViOOc8cQn0H8l7mSKCE34ylNpdaN0je9K6MS/6c/XtMKH2ygM1aP/ahkm4RbBojjKAqQow5ZjZYdaQfZ5jquK0G2Fd3Tc0HdOYoi/Lpe1vWL//21bEtNoulNyA29dabhwKnSZDooggX5xJEv6fP9LVHRFawNoitklfQIJ7omqFNC+3YXXEUcoIPbILp45W/Rp92BDexbeZNtjrhSxAFB2eIa196YrH5LrkmAiK0CSwSmGJ/9y09eLq62peCKK62mh6gIQaRzU+ckgJuqRY7MnmzL3hY9NZVepbkQDoeGpiS6bxpCzoSA8F9+w==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901;; cv=none; b=cGgRG4Yy6x2x376nDimqlaO6Y4aLPXlW45CzrhLAk+MrlUjqaCUnYKEF+EiLlyL2JRkRQHzD68jkrvQn5YRi7Eok1uDL5s0/ajk4m1SvlzDjnCMIQAp1X88+dsPWXRAeFpHGWK1KMe25mR+kUBIhR2bzDLV6c2J6VxBvCpTNzgIk29IEhdZdj6VvA+if+1HjOs7rMmmUOuOmIP0/5uybfQUsMaIZVZsF/zj9uou3yMuptLsowkJdhOXYS2/XFTaRqRZ57hBBcBNBpNnRDrXia+KxyyaJTLauq4aWzKzycWtx+tzWjBNqfZqyF9eJetAHF2iaU0VkYjRd2xhUws4QjA==
  • Delivered-to: rest-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
  • List-archive: <>
  • List-help: <>
  • List-subscribe: <>, <>
  • List-unsubscribe: <>, <>
  • Thread-index: AQHaZPOZ1VPMS46pL0Wjf2iRUy3MlLEVXXwAgAEsOwA=
  • Thread-topic: [External] : Re: [rest-dev] EE11 Platform call update

On Feb 21, 2024, at 5:17 PM, James Perkins via rest-dev <rest-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:27 AM Markus Karg via rest-dev <rest-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Speaking just for myself, I need to say that I do have a problem with *removing* JAXB. I have to maintain a software that on one hand shall use latest features, but on the other hand MUST stick with JAXB for backwards compatibility. It is OK for me that JAXB would become *optional* so I can simply drop it into the mix on my own. But *removing* instead of *optional* is a no-go for me and completely WAY off Java's long-term backwards compatibility benefit. Having said that, it is not our charter to necessarily do exactly what the platform people dream of just because they would like so, in particular not *forcefully remove* things just because they want to spare maintenance costs for their paid products or whatever benefit they like to have from *removing* it. Due to that I am -1 for *forcefully removing* JAXB, but I am +1 for having it *optional* in the sense of "application vendors can put it on the classpath if needed". As a side effect, there is not justification for a 4.0.


The removal of XML Binding was already done in the release-4.0 branch [1]. I wouldn't think we'd be doing anything beyond removing the module dependency and the Link.JaxbAdatper and Link.JaxbLink [2].

 That’s the only compile-time dependency that I remember, so that is basically it AFAICT.

— Santiago

Is this what you mean or do you mean specifically with the specification document removing the optional XML Binding specification?

FWIW my understanding is we only want to remove the module dependency and the two deprecated types.



Von: rest-dev [mailto:rest-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Jim Krueger via rest-dev
Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Februar 2024 20:04
An: Jakarta Rest project developer discussions
Cc: Jim Krueger
Betreff: [rest-dev] EE11 Platform call update



In this morning's EE11 Platform call there was renewed concerns about the possibility that Jakarta Rest may need to remain on 3.1 for EE11. The primary point of concern centered around the fact that XML binding would be moving to optional in EE11. This will cause a problem for Jakarta Rest since the deprecated dependency with JAXB is not slated for removal prior to JAkarta Rest 4.0. It was discussed that we might be asked to put out Jakarta Rest 4.0 containing only the removal of the JAXB dependency. I'd also assume if our work with release-3.2 reaches a point where it could be included in EE11 that there would likely be a push to rename 3.2 to 4.0 in order to allow the JAXB dependency removal to be included.

I was not in a position to advocate a course of action. I felt that the group should be made aware of this discussion.

rest-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat
rest-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!J5foP08J_XQHAeZT9ZvqEExu45Gy-88FnuocyjoLkPlP78zpO--5ZTJ4ORylKyZm0OndpZc-UodBUKa7_iPsztIHw_0o$

Back to the top