Jakarta EE Platform Call

Date: 2023-05-30

Present:

• Lenny Primak (Individual)
• Jared Anderson (IBM)
• Emily Jiang (IBM)
• Jim Krueger (IBM)
• Nathan Rauh (IBM)
• Ed Burns (MSFT)
• Ivar Grimstad (Eclipse Foundation)
• Cesar Hernandez (Tomitribe)
• Scott Stark (Red Hat)
• Petr Aubrecht (Payara)
• Jan Westerkamp (iJUG)
• Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle)
• Arjan Tijms (OmniFish)
• Werner Keil (Individual)

Agenda and Minutes

ACTION: Getting all specs through Plan Review

• https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-platform/issues/681
• Plan Review PRs: https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22plan+review%22
  • Ed to compare query list with responses from spreadsheet
  • Ed Bean Validation:
    • Are you doing anything with records for EE11?
    • What about changing the name to just “Jakarta Validation”?
  • Jared discovered that Persistence was missing. Lukas had committed to having it in. Arjan to contact Lukas.
  • Spec committee to review these on 2023-05-31 12:00 EDT

ACTION: Get Jakarta EE 11 Release Plan DRAFT (source link) beyond DRAFT state

• EE11 labeled issues
• Wave discussion: see https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-platform/issues/685
• Nathan brought up the question of what about the proposed new specs?
  • Resolved to get a sufficiently done version in 685 and then apply the proposed new specs. This is not an official endorsement of the inclusion of that new spec in EE11, but it’s useful to think about it now.
  • DONE: Arjan to take the discussion we did to day to the platform-dev list. Subject: platform-685: Wave discussion
    • https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-platform/issues/687

Lenny’s Issue https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-api/issues/138 two PRs

• https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-api/pull/139
• https://github.com/jakartaee/jakartaee-api/pull/137
• But what about the subtlety of CDI vs CDI lite?
  • Web profile includes all of CDI
  • Core profile only includes CDI lite
  • Lenny’s answer: you just add it on as a regular maven dependency.
• ACTION: Arjan to take the discussion to platform-dev. Subject: jakartaee-api: 138: Lenny’s PRs.
  • ~~Let’s say we merge PR 137 now. ~~
    • Makes all the platform jars empty.
    • Jan asked about the faces jar question?
      • Lenny asserts this is not an issue. He has already tested it.
      • Arjan mentioned for EE 11 Faces will go with a separate API jar.
  • Emily wants to have some plan of record for what we will do for the future releases when shipping CDI-lite in Jakarta Core Profile while Jakarta Web Profile needs to add the remaining part of CDI. This is for PR 139.
    • Current state
      • Core profile jar includes whole CDI
      • Web profile jar includes whole CDI
    • Desired future state
      • Core profile jar includes CDI lite
      • Web profile jar includes CDI lite and a jar that is the “rest of CDI”
    • Arjan observes the EJB EJB-lite thing is analogous.
    • Jan observes the TCK in question needs to be split apart to enable this.

TCK check in

• Scott Stark: any status on the “two repos” thing to explore the possibility of automating the mass rewriting of TCK tests?
  • Status:
    • discovered more 2nd order ignorance
    • Scott will write up existing two repos so we can have a follow up meeting.

Emily: Chinese community participation meeting

• When? TBD.
• Can Jianguo from my team give at most five minutes of stage time for an overview of what MS is doing for Jakarta EE on Azure? Yes.

[Emily]OpenRewrite for Jakarta EE migration

• Some limited investment here