package means folders in which classes are, not jar. For ref: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/tree/master/java/jakarta
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 16:53, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> a écrit : > This is from tomcat.apache.org > > Users of Tomcat 10 onwards should be aware that, as a result of the > move from Java EE to Jakarta EE as part of the transfer of Java EE to > the Eclipse Foundation, the primary package for all implemented APIs > has changed from javax.* to jakarta.*. This will almost certainly > require code changes to enable applications to migrate from Tomcat 9 > and earlier to Tomcat 10 and later. A migration tool is under > development to aid this process. > > On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 at 22:52, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 16:48, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> a > > écrit : > > > > > I'm OK with reverting if Automatic-Module-Name will be specified > > > > > > What is wrong with Jakarta licensing? > > > Tomcat-10-M1 was just released with jakarta jars .... > > > > > > > Dont think, they host the code as geronimo does. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 at 22:23, Romain Manni-Bucau < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 16:17, Mark Struberg > <[email protected]> > > > a > > > > écrit : > > > > > > > > > Btw, the whole module system is a big fail. > > > > > There are right now discussions in BIG projects to skip all that > and > > > > > revert to just plain jars again. > > > > > > > > > > The point is that we right now have our own sources and are fine > with > > > it. > > > > > I really don't understand the point of changing this in a minor > > > version. > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a few thgs to consider I think: > > > > > > > > 1. There is this 1 for 1000 users of jpms so even if a failure, we > should > > > > comply with it today > > > > 2. We must ensure to have the same name than the official spec jar > > > > otherwise your link descriptor - module info - looses its portability > > > > 3. We must not deliver the spec jar transitively so the one we build > > > > against must not be important except for the assembly (if no more > > > relevant > > > > we can drop it IMHO) > > > > > > > > Now, if the action is to rerelease jpa geronimo jar with the official > > > > mofule name, lets just do it if jakarta jar license is not asf > friendly - > > > > will be needed for asf projects delivering it anyway. > > > > > > > > Hope it makes sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > Am 29.02.2020 um 16:09 schrieb Mark Struberg > > > <[email protected] > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry that this slipped. This imo needs further discussion. > > > > > > The license aspect is not clear imo. > > > > > > We also break many downstream openjpa users which had their whole > > > > > toolset tailored for geronimo-specs. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 for a revert and cleanup of geronimo-jpa-spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > >> Am 25.12.2019 um 12:40 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik < > > > [email protected]>: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> You are right > > > > > >> this change breaks java8 build > > > > > >> OK, my PR will stay the same :)) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > WBR > > > Maxim aka solomax > > > > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax >
