Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] [BALLOT] Progress Review for Jakarta EE 11

[Arjan Tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 16:36, marceloancelmo via jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

+1 (LJC)

I understand that this is beneficial to the whole community, as they have the option to choose the between versions 17 and 21

As a personal comment, not with my coordinator hat on, I do have to protest that this is strictly beneficial to the whole community. 

Choice is not always good when it concerns specifications, as it effectively loosens the specification. Case in point is perhaps USB 3.2, which gives users the option to choose, but by doing that you effectively don't know what just "USB 3.2" gives you. See e.g. https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/usb-3-2-explained-making-sense-of-current-and-confusing-usb-standard/

This change doesn't benefit extension libraries like e.g. OmniFaces either, which now can't use JDK 21 features and market itself "For Jakarta EE 11". With my OmniFaces hat on, I have to say "For Jakarta EE 11, but not the JDK 17 implementations / installations of Jakarta EE 11". Clearly that is a far more confusing message. Effectively this change just means lowering the JDK version. OmniFaces will be forced to use JDK 17 (as it's the lowest common denominator).

Just my 2 cents, and otherwise not opposing this change. Just wanted to make it clear that we understand this is not strictly beneficial to everyone.

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms