Thank you Richard for starting this thread. My view is simpler perhaps: I would not make this about the javax vs Jakarta namespaces.
I don't want to double the numbers of jars we produce from the same branch for affected components as one of the scheme proposed. It feels like a burden to maintenance moving forward and a very brittle process with some unforeseen side effects. This is just a code change IMO. For a given component, either it is binary compatible, or it is not. You don't know until you try it and see if public and protected elements break, using our existing configuration of Maven and japicmp (or revapi). If it is binary compatible, then let's consider making the change. If not, then do it in a major version, where the previous major version is maintained as we do now, as need be. A new major version also benefits from the usual dropping of deprecated elements and making any other changes with seem reasonable. Gary On Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 04:35 Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > based on the discussion [1] for DBCP, I wanted to start a discussion > whether and how the Apache Commons project might/want to support the > Jakarta namespace changes. > > I know, that not all commons projects are impacted by the namespaces > change, but we should make sure, that users can use related projects > like DBCP with the emerging presense of Jakarta EE 9 / 10 in the near > future. > > Other EE-related projects decided to use a relocation approach as shown > in [1], which might not be a feasable option for every project impacted > by the change. As suggested by @garydgregory in [1], the sanest way > would be to change the source code. This might break binary > compatibility and requires new major versions and effort to maintain > both worlds (javax, jakarta) as javax will be still around for some > time. > > Ideally, we find some sort of agreement to move on, so depending > projects like TomEE or users can use jakarta ready artifacts. I am > happy to contribute / be part of that journey. > > So the question boils down to: > > (a) Switch to jakarta (and provide javax artifacts via relocation) > (b) Stay on javax (and provide jakarta artifacts via relocation) > (c) Maintain two branches (jakarta & javax) and cherry pick changes > between them. > (d) Abandon javax and move on > (e) Something else? > > > Any thoughts, ideas, visions regarding that topic? > > Gruß > Richard > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/248 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
