So we have been discussion where these cross specification integration requirements should be landing to avoid polluting the component specification API and TCK artifacts with 'downstream' dependencies that can both cause cycles and delays in releasing component specifications.
The last discussion in the platform dev group and specification committee seemed to be point in the direction of moving these requirements into the platform specs in some way. Along those lines, I have created a draft PR for the Persistence/CDI native integration requirements that was starting to be looked at in the Persistence specification. This PR:
is a prototype of what such integration specification might look like. One thing that it immediately shows is the tension between configuration and SPI type of APIs. In that prototype there is an alternate schema for the persistence.xml file that adds support for CDI specific integration, but the corresponding jakarta.persistence.spi.PersistenceUnitInfo interface is no longer a complete representation of this version of persistence.xml.
Another concern brought up by the persistence spec members is not wanting integration requirements authored by a platform group without sign-off from them. If adding integration specification requirements to the platform is a direction we want to head, I would propose that there be an update to the operations guide to require that there is an issue to track sign-off of the component team(s) on integration specifications and TCKs.
Take a look at the PR and lets discuss if this is the direction we want to be heading.
