Jakarta EE Platform Call

Date: 2025-11-25

Present:

• Jared Anderson (IBM)
• Kyle Aure (IBM)
• Chithra Mini (IBM)
• Anand N K (IBM)
• James Perkins (IBM)
• Nathan Rauh (IBM)
• Reshmi Vijayan (IBM)
• Ivar Grimstad (Eclipse Foundation)
• Michael Redlich (Garden State JUG)
• Jan Westerkamp (iJUG)
• Cesar Hernandez (Tomitribe)
• Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle)
• Petr Aubrecht (Payara)
• Nathan Erwin (Individual)

Top of mind for Jared, James

• December meeting schedule
  • Canceled next call (December 2) due to JakartaOne Livestream
  • Will have last meetings of the year on December 9 and 16
  • Canceling Dec 23 and 30 meetings as well. Will be back on January 6.
• 4 new CCRs outstanding. 1 new one since last week.

Jakarta EE 12

• OSSRH Update
  • Work on a staging replacement has been initiated. Follow and comment in the issue.
  • Question: Do we need this for all EE4J projects, or only Specification Projects
    • Yes so can stage implementations when doing ratifying of a specification
  • repo.eclipse.org will become the new staging location for us to put artifacts while we are working on ratification of specifications
  • New plugin will exist to stage artifacts to the repo.eclipse.org
• MicroProfile and Jakarta update
  • Ballot with spec committee was started for bringing MP into Jakarta using existing namespace
    • Ballot was to end yesterday
    • Evidence of votes from the mailing list indicates that it has failed
  • Jan: Namespaces are to help separate when in different orgs. After coming into Jakarta WG, they are the same org so should have same namespace
    • Doing the change once with a major release avoids having to do major releases over and over as some specs are moved to the jakarta specs for things like JWT and REST
    • Need to choose jakarta packages that do not conflict with other existing jakarta specifications
    • Should MP be a new profile in Jakarta platform? “Jakarta Micro Profile” or should it be a separate offering outside of the Jakarta Platform? Just because it is part of Jakarta WG doesn’t automatically make it part of the platform.
    • Obviously we want to get MP Config moved into Core Profile as Jakarta Config. If Jakarta Config is in org.eclipse.microprofile it becomes an issue of consistency.
    • Telemetry is special in that it doesn’t have a MP namespaced API. Will we need to make a jakarta namespaced API to wrap it to satisfy these requirements? Telemetry is an established namespace in a different organization. So it would be an exception to the rule.
    • Newer developers may be turned off by a fragmented API (feedback from a recent conference). Existing applications that already use MP APIs will feel the pain of migrating to a new namespace.
    • Comparing the transition of MP namespace change to Java EE namespace change is not necessarily fair since MP has a smaller API and MP frequently changes things in a breaking way. With the new tooling added from the Java EE namespace transition that will make it easier for MP developers
    • Similar discussions took place in the last MicroProfile Steering Committee Meeting here.
  • More discussions will likely happen at the next Jakarta Specification Committee with going over the ballot results. Currently scheduled for tomorrow, but could move.
• Jakarta EE 12 Milestone 2
  • Limited progress since Milestone 1.
  • Considering extending Milestone 2 into January
  • Holidays at the end of the year do not help with getting things done
  • Platform / spec committee task / requirements were not created yet for Milestone 2 issues which never happened yet
• Jakarta Platform TCK call is next week Wednesday
• Open Floor
  • Michael: Jakarta starter project. Who owns it?
    • It is an EE4J project. It is normal project with committers. Can contribute and get added as a committer.
    • As a product is certified on a new version we want to get it added to the starter.
    • If products have their own starter it is good to know that as well to help create the jakarta starter for that product