Hello David, Just my point of view that I want to share with you. Of course not everyone is using µServices architecture but there is some traction on that.
For example, we have migrated 2 of our solutions from monolith to µServices architecture and we are using for the moment TomEE 8.0.5. So , for our organization, MP specifications are quite important. The consequence is that we are waiting for a close following of the specifications as they evolved. David, as you said, TomEE 8.0.5 is in between 2.1/2.2 MP specifications. But it's too old ! :-( The version 4.0.1 has just been released, between 2.2 and 4.0.1, 5 MP specifications releases have been published. I am afraid that if you don't put some priority on MP, most of the people, wanting to build a Java µService architecture, will use Quarkus or Helidon for such thing instead of using TomEE ! For example, following MP specifications as much as possible, is more important than having a full compliancy with Jakarta EE 8 or 9. Ask the question to the community and let's see the answers ? Again I just want to share my feelings about the TomEE roadmap. Best Regards. -----Original Message----- From: David Blevins [mailto:david.blev...@gmail.com] Sent: mardi 12 janvier 2021 23:04 To: users@tomee.apache.org Subject: Re: TomeEE 8.0.5 and microprofile JWT RBAC 1.1 Hello Francois, TomEE 8 does support MicroProfile JWT 1.1. As for the overall level of support, MicroProfile 2.1 would be the most accurate version to cite, though the answer is really it's a bit mixed. Essentially MicroProfile 2.1 is the last MicroProfile version that included Fault Tolerance 1.x. MicroProfile 2.2 switched to FaultTolerance 2.0 which is not supported. Some of the specs are more current than the versions that were included in MicroProfile 2.1, so parts of our MicroProfile support is more current. The technique of looking at the related API jar as you did is the right one to use. Most people are working on Jakarta EE 8 compliance with a secondary focus on Jakarta EE 9 compliance as they are the same TCK just with different namespaces. I suspect when that is done people will move onto getting MicroProfile compliance more current. That isn't to say help getting MicroProfile support more current right now wouldn't be extremely welcome -- it definitely would -- however, no one has volunteered yet so it sits in the "someday" pile. Hope that helps. -- David Blevins http://twitter.com/dblevins http://www.tomitribe.com > On Dec 18, 2020, at 2:18 AM, COURTAULT Francois > <francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > Could anyone answer to the questions below ? > Thanks in advance. > > Best Regards. > > -----Original Message----- > From: COURTAULT Francois [mailto:francois.courta...@thalesgroup.com] > Sent: vendredi 11 décembre 2020 18:23 > To: users@tomee.apache.org > Subject: TomeEE 8.0.5 and microprofile JWT RBAC 1.1 > > Hello everyone, > > Is TomEE 8.0.5 certified for micro-profile JWT 1.1 ? > Looking at the lib embedded, microprofile-jwt-auth-api-1.1.1.jar, I would say > yes, but I prefer to check. > > BTW, it's a recurrent question I have: what is the micro-profile version on > which TomEE 8.0.5 is certified ? > The lastest version is 3.3. > > Best Regards. > > >
