Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Transitioning Jakarta EE to the jakarta nam

[Edwin Derks <ederks85@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

and big thanks David for starting this thread! I also would like to share my thoughts and have done so at my blog. Whatever the path we are going to take with this transition, I will try to assist wherever I can.

Thanks,

Edwin

On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 04:33, David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Great to hear from you!

> On May 6, 2019, at 7:22 PM, Hildeberto Mendonça <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> A way to add value is not increasing the maintenance cost and preserving backwards compatibility. I'm afraid Proposal 1 would break these two values.
> I would prefer Proposal 2 if jakarta worked as a wrapper around javax, preserving the same interfaces, reusing what is already there and innovating on the wrapper side.

Both proposals involve what you would call "a wrapper" and have the same basic backwards compatibility challenge of having to figure out how to make old apps run.

The primary place they differ is:

 - do we break compatibility bit by bit over time in an as-needed basis
 - do we break compatibility in one shot and get it over with

The primary question here is as a user how do you want to deal with migrating and potential compatibility issues:

 - bit by bit over time
 - in one shot

Knowing neither path frees you from having to absorb a backwards incompatible change and the solutions would be the same, which timeline is your preferred?


-David

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev