| [cn4j-alliance] Results! - Jakarta EE/MicroProfile Alignment Survey |
Folks,
We closed the Jakarta EE/MicroProfile alignment survey and now have the results. Just as some of the earlier surveys have indicated, a fairly strong majority of developers want some MicroProfile specifications to move to Jakarta EE including the namespace. This is congruent with the official Jakarta EE Ambassadors joint position (to be published soon).
* Move MicroProfile specifications to Jakarta EE without changing
namespaces. - 19.55%
* Move MicroProfile specifications to Jakarta EE including the
namespace. - 57.73%
* Reference MicroProfile specifications in Jakarta EE and not move
MicroProfile specifications. - 13.64%
* Create Jakarta EE versions of MicroProfile specifications. -
9.09%
Many people entered comments and frankly each one of them is invaluable. I cannot do everyone justice but the following is a decent sampling representing the majority opinion.
"MicroProfile should evolve APIs that eventually get absorbed by
Jakarta EE. MicroProfile applications should eventually be able to
run
with pure Jakarta EE APIs."
"Moving MicroProfile specs into Jakarta EE including namespace
will make clear where the longer term specs are maintained. Also,
for
MicroProfile users it's a very easy migration path."
"I think no matter which of these options is chosen there is going
to be an effect on either end users, or developers. Therefore, I
would rather make the large upfront breaking changes all at once
and merge the two into the same namespace. Then, have consistency
going forward."
"I would see the movement from org.eclipse.microprofile to the
jakarta namespace as a sign of maturity (and success) for
MicroProfile."
"Option A2 has fewer cons and is more end user friendly."
"Using a different namespace makes it clear what version and
expectations (e.g. backward compatibility) the user is making.
Moving without a
namespace is confusing."
"The aim of a specification should always be to make something as
simple and clear as possible. The entry barriers and opportunities
for error for
new and inexperienced developers must be as low as possible. An
inconsistent namespace or even the possibility of circular
dependencies make the
use simply too complicated and difficult. At the end of the day,
it's all about the economic and productive development of
applications."
"Move some MicroProfile specifications (e.g. MP Config when its
stable) to Jakarta EE including the namespace."
I really hope this helps pave the way for sensible decisions. For me, gathering input and listening to people that won't necessarily send emails here is extremely important.
I will leave it to the discretion of the Eclipse Foundation if
the raw results should be shared publicly. Personally I plan to
write a brief blog entry to add my take on the results.
Reza Rahman
Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Blogger, Speaker
Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual
community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.