Skip to main content

Jakarta EE Platform Call

Date: 2025-04-01
Present:

  • James Perkins (Red Hat)
  • Jared Anderson (IBM)
  • Anand NK (IBM)
  • Nathan Rauh (IBM)
  • Petr Aubrecht (Payara)
  • Brian Stansberry (Red Hat)
  • Cesar Hernandez (Tomitribe)
  • Ed Bratt (Oracle)
  • Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle)
  • Gurunandan Rao (Oracle)

Top of mind for Ed, Arjan, Jared

  • Web Profile 11 ballot
    • Monday marked 7 days since ballot started
    • Super majority has approved the ballot, but everyone needs to vote so if there are people who have not voted, they would need to do so
  • Profile dependency discussion in the mailing list
    • Web Profile depending on core profile (starting in EE 11)
    • Platform depending on Web Profile (starting in EE 10)
    • Dependency is in POM which is not a normative artifact
    • BOM is normative?
      • From historical perspective, vendors are not required to consume binary artifacts from Jakarta
      • Normative artifacts are TCK, specification, and TCK user’s guide
        • Everything else can be derived from those.
      • Apache delivered their own versions under apache license instead of using CDDL
      • APIs are convenience that are produced
      • This is the historical perspective from Java EE time frame
    • The changes made to the POM files were to help the developer of Jakarta to have an improved experience
  • Jakarta HTTP proposal draft
    • Still in progress
    • Want to have a draft proposal started in order to start dialog with other people using that draft to kick start discussion

TCK Refactoring Jakarta EE 11

  • 50 failure in the persistence tests currently that Scott M is looking into
  • Appclient tests are failing currently. May need to update test setup for deploying application clients
  • Updating user guide for the platform only sections

Jakarta EE 11

  • Ed B. – TCK CCR – Ref #1052, Is this the format that we want to review?
    • SHA sums are not included for the other TCKs besides the main platform TCK
      • The SHA sums are in the public results page, but that could potentially lost in the future, so it would be good to have the SHA sums listed in the CCR since that is stored in github and will not go away
    • Results page has a mix of required TCKs and results from the platform TCK itself and it is confusing since it isn’t formatted well to show which ones are coming from the platform TCK instead of from the component specifications also required to be tested
      • More of this is an organization issue of the results. Platform and component TCK results are all mixed in alphabetical order mostly
      • This could serve as a template for other people doing results pages
      • The results page does not include a full web profile TCK total
      • Does user guide include anything about how the format of a result report should look like? No
      • People look at the ratifying implementation results page to see if they are in the right ballpark for number of tests
      • Want to have this results page re-organized to have results listed under their particular TCK artifact
      • Want to have a summary of the aggregate number of tests
      • Followup will be done tomorrow at the TCK call
      • In the future it would be good to have an automated report of the CI jobs’ output

Jakarta EE 12

  • Release plan project board – https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/17
    • Several specifications are in ballot or have drafted a plan. Many more to go
    • Deadline for drafted and ready for mentors to review is April 15 – 2 weeks
    • If no release plan created by April 15, you may not be included in EE 12
    • If you do not plan to have an update, you can close out the issue
    • Some specifications are indicating they will take over a year to complete the work for their next version and have set release dates of their component in June of 2026.
    • Need to flush out an EE 12 development schedule to see how things fit in and if we can pull in any of those dates.
  • Jakarta Query
    • Creation review is complete and the project should be provisioned over the next few weeks
  • Jakarta Config / MicroProfile Config
    • MicroProfile will be doing a ballot to decide to move to the Jakarta Working Group
    • Then, Jakarta Working Group will have a ballot to accept MicroProfile specifications into Jakarta Working Group
    • If all goes well, then Core Profile can depend on MicroProfile Config
    • Debate on namespace will be worked out – leave org.eclipse.microprofile vs move to jakarta
  • Jakarta NoSQL
    • 1.0 version is released
    • Include NoSQL in Jakarta EE 12?
      • User brings their own implementation like JDBC. App server doesn’t need to provide one
        • Driver vs implementation of the NoSQL
        • Only implementation today is JNoSQL
        • Today the application can include the implementation and driver or could be provided by the application server so that the application does not need to include it
        • If included in EE 12, the Jakarta NoSQL API would be required to be available to the application to not require the application to include it
      • Will including NoSQL in EE 12 require a 1.1 version?
        • No driver concept in 1.0. It is implementation specific
        • Community has talked about adding a driver API in next release
  • Jakarta HTTP
    • Move the below content to a google doc so that others can participate and add content / comments to the document to get it flushed out to get ready to create a proposal for the specification committee
      • ACTION: Arjan to move it to Google doc
    • Draft scope:
      • The initial scope is intended to be kept quite small. Basically standardise across the platform what’s now HttpServletRequest and HttpServletResponse.

      • Both Servlet and REST and essentially some APIs building on these. At least Security (as it obviously also needs to get headers and set cookies etc)

      • Maybe update parts of Faces to use it, IFF doable. And then Portlets could likely implement this too. So in a way its replacement for Faces’ ExternalContext & friends. Although first target is Servlet / Rest alignment and Security.

    • public class RequestData implements Serializable {

      private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;

      private Cookie[] cookies;
      private Map<String, List<String>> headers;
      private Map<String, String[]> parameters;
      private List<Locale> locales;

      private String method;

      private String requestURL;

      private String queryString;

      public Cookie[] getCookies() {

      return cookies;

      }

      public Map<String, List<String>> getHeaders() {

      return headers;

      }

      public List<Locale> getLocales() {

      return locales;

      }

      public Map<String, String[]> getParameters() {

      return parameters;

      }

      public String getMethod() {

      return method;

      }

      public String getQueryString() {

      return queryString;

      }

      public String getRequestURL() {

      return requestURL;

      }

      }

  • Jakarta MVC
    • Spec seems quite dormant
      • EE 11 alignment work had stated, but it hasn’t moved forward it appears
      • May need to follow up with Ivar
  • Jakarta RPC
    • Also has been quite quiet
    • Helidon possibly has a gRPC MicroProfile client
    • Quarkus has a different approach than Helidon
    • Liberty also provide gRPC function
    • Having a standard API for the different vendors to use to make some easy for customers not have to re-write when using different vendors

Back to the top