Date: 2025-05-20
Present:
- Jared Anderson (IBM)
- Kyle Aure (IBM)
- Emily Jiang (IBM)
- Chithra Mini (IBM)
- Anand N K (IBM)
- Nathan Rauh (IBM)
- Jan Westerkamp (iJUG)
- John Clingan (Red Hat)
- Arjan Tijms (OmniFish)
- David Matejcek (OmniFish)
- Cesar Hernandez (Tomtribe)
- Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle)
- Gurunandan Rao(Oracle)
Top of mind for Ed, Arjan, Jared
- OSSRH maven changes are happening in the near future as documented in this mailing list post.
- Ivar is following up on this issue.
- Likely will try to do a new version of the ee4j parent to resolve this issue and then all will benefit
- Existing releases
- Next service release of projects will need to update to use the new parent version and update ci job likely
- New release (standalone or EE 12)
- Will need to have ci job updated and need to use new parent version
- Arjan put together fixes for two problem that were test setup issues for TCK
- App client changes to deploy ear file, download app client module and then use that in the new app client protocol function in the TCK.
Jakarta EE 11
- Tentative schedule thoughts
- May 21 TCK complete
- June 5 CCR created and mentor review started
- June 9 start ballot (complete 7 to 14 days)
- Data API added to Glassfish will be done shortly and a new release created
- Plan to work on this with the other two bugs opened up for what are perceived regressions to be resolved and include in a new release.
- Seeing many tests still failing. May be more things to work out.
- Assembly
- EJB tests
- Mail TCK
- Signature (Requires Data API update)
- Final version of Expressly 6.0 being released now that the CI is back.
- Required for Hibernate Validator 9.0 to do its final release.
- Arjan proposed to try to deprecate App Client in EE 11 still
- Too late to try to make such a change. It is part of the EE 12 platform release plan though.
Jakarta EE 12
- Plan review ballot status https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/17
- Final spec (Activation) has been sent to ballot
- New specifications to consider for Jakarta EE 12 platform / profiles
- Query 1.0
- Pretty much expect to be part of the Jakarta EE 12
- Is it too early to have a ballot to include No SQL in EE 11 Web Profile?
- Previously we talked about not having a 1.0 added to the platform. That was discussion for NoSQL. We didn’t do that though with Data 1.0 though.
- During EE 11 for NoSQL, it was not ready even for a 1.0 at the time
- Yes likely because there is no milestone content yet, but mostly it is a refactor of what is in Persistence / Data
- Watch for progress and add during a milestone
- NoSQL 1.1
- 1.1 release plan created to include Driver function
- 1.0 released in the recent past which would have been too late for EE 11 which is why not included there
- Is it too early to have a ballot to include NoSQL in EE 11 Web Profile?
- Again wait to see what the new function in 1.1 (Driver API) looks like before considering it for inclusion in the platform / web profile.
- MVC 3.1
- 3.0 was released for support of EE 11
- 3.1 is for EE 12 support
- Development is rather quiet and slow, but some of that is because it is relatively stable / mature. It is about 8 to 9 years old
- Rendering has been in and out of fashion over the years. Faces also does similar rendering. Having two offerings may be overkill. Pages also does server side rendering of sorts.
- For EE 11, ballot for inclusion was a No and to keep it as a standalone specification
- Vendors know of how much use they see in their products
- Glassfish has MVC included and has seen at least one customer using it
- Liberty does not have MVC in its product
- Wildfly recently included it?
- Payara may be adding it or if it has been added yet is unknown
- Alternative for Spring MVC and was big about 10 years ago, but has quieted down with the rise of things like client side frameworks like Angular
- Due to the many things above, it is likely better for this spec to stay standalone
- Could be a question for the next survey. Which front end technologies are used? – Faces, Pages, MVC, GWT?, Wicket, others
- HTTP
- Too early to know if will be part of EE 12
- Creation proposal isn’t done yet
- Config from MicroProfile
- Need to wait on MP to Jakarta to complete. See below. [John] Not 100% bought in, but the idea has merit. John to go back to red hatters to get thoughts.
- RPC
- Seems little interest
- Little to no development happening lately
- Likely it makes sense to remain as a standalone specification
- Portlet / Portlet Bridge
- Too early to discuss for inclusion in the platform since it is in creation review right now
- This is a specification for Java EE that is being “jakarta-ized”
- It was standalone in Java EE so likely should remain standalone as well in Jakarta EE
- Likely should not be part of the platform since it is very specific use case
- Any specifications to consider deprecating from the platform / profiles
- Jakarta HTTP
- Mailing list communication to platform, rest and servlet hasn’t happened yet.
- Arjan still working on this. There was productive feedback in the google doc. https://docs.google.com/document/d/12niPzZdISs7hRdTWsZn_JM30Et9kWuih4F8h87LKHI4/edit?usp=sharing
- Alvin or Guru may also help with getting this added to the mailing list
- MicroProfile moving to Jakarta update
- Straw poll was run last week
- Namespace question – jakarta vs org.eclipse.microprofile
- Having discussions before doing the official ballot
- People had concerns about conflation of issue in the poll
- 2 keep namespace, 1 change name space and 4 confusion about conflation of ideas
- One idea came out – Consider letting each MP component spec decide on name space within the Jakarta Working Group (“after” merge)
- More discussion on the results at today’s MP technical call
- Jan suggested to have a straw poll about the basic question of MP moving to Jakarta and if there are any red lines for any voting members, ex. Namespace
- Name space is probably the most controversial
- Moving to a Jakarta profile and the name of that profile in Jakarta will be the next thing to determine
- Config being part of Jakarta EE 12 is dependent on the MP WG coming over to Jakarta
- Don’t want Jakarta EE 12 to be the deciding reason for the move over to Jakarta
- Moving of Config to Jakarta should be the first thing done after MP move is decided / approved
- If not approved as a whole we could consider just doing MP Config and do others later
- Administrative issues board https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/18
