Tomcat still has an ancient code structure. They still use ant. And they still have all the stuff checked in to their own project
https://github.com/apache/tomcat/tree/master/java/jakarta <https://github.com/apache/tomcat/tree/master/java/jakarta> So they just renamed the package, but the sources are still all ASF with full ALv2 and no single line taken from Eclipse. https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/master/java/jakarta/servlet/Filter.java <https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/master/java/jakarta/servlet/Filter.java> So they are basically doing what we do at geronimo. Parts of the specs are even 1:1 copied over from geronimo-specs. And the servlet-api in geronimo is otoh copied over from tomcat. LieGrue, strub > Am 29.02.2020 um 16:53 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com>: > > 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 <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 16:48, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> 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 <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 16:17, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> >>> 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 >>> <strub...@yahoo.de.INVALID >>>>>> : >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 < >>> solomax...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You are right >>>>>>> this change breaks java8 build >>>>>>> OK, my PR will stay the same :)) >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> WBR >>> Maxim aka solomax >>> > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax
