We're not using Tomcat, but it appears so. For Jetty, version 11 is required to support Jakarta, which is Java 11+ only.
That's one more reason to keep 5.8 around and backport as long as reasonably possible. On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 10:11 PM Volker Lamp <volker.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for a clean cut / move to jakarta with Tapestry release 5.9. > > I guess this implies upgrading from Java Servlet 3.0 to Jakarta Servlet > 5.0. > > Would this again imply Tomcat 10.+ is required to run Tapestry? > > > Am 23.07.2022 um 15:36 schrieb David Taylor < > david.tay...@extensiatech.com>: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > We have a similar requirement since we are looking to make the jump to > Spring Boot 3.0 and Hibernate 6.1 which require Jakarta EE 9 and Java 17. > Thanks to everyone's hard work, we have a very solid release that made it > easy to move to Java 17. The transition to Jakarta EE is looking to be much > more daunting since it is an all or nothing upgrade. > > > > I personally agree with Ben's preference for making a clean break. I > imagine maintaining separate releases would not be trivial and would add > significant overhead to the testing and release process. The Java ecosystem > is clearly arriving a major inflection point. I believe we should embrace > the trend since doing otherwise may begin to feel like death by a thousand > cuts due to the never ending stream of updates to stay ahead of security > vulnerabilities. > > > > Best regards, > > David > > > >> On 7/23/2022 8:03 AM, Ben Weidig wrote: > >> Hi Andrus! > >> > >> Personally, I would prefer a hard cut with a minor version bump to 5.9 > for > >> a Jakarta-only Tapestry with 5.8 remaining JavaEE, instead of creating > >> additional projects like tapestry-http-jakarta. > >> > >> Essential features, bug fixes, etc., should be backported to 5.8 for a > >> migration phase to allow users to get newer features even if they can't > >> migrate to Jakarta at the moment. > >> And if they finally can migrate, they hopefully don't need to change > much, > >> at least regarding Tapestry itself. > >> > >> At some point in the future, though, we should only backport > >> security-related changes from 5.9 to 5.8, especially if the branches > start > >> to differ too much and backporting becomes a chore thanks to too many > merge > >> conflicts, etc. > >> > >> Please consider that I don't have much experience handling breaking > changes > >> / library deprecations in an open-source setting, so I'm looking > forward to > >> any suggestion on how to handle it :-) > >> > >> Cheers > >> Ben > >> > >> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 11:08 AM Andrus Adamchik <aadamc...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi folks, > >>> > >>> As you probably know, JavaEE has been EOL'd for some time, and > everyone is > >>> slowly moving to JakartaEE. And this requires an entirely new build of > >>> every application and framework because of the package change from > >>> "javax.*" to "jakarta.*". > >>> > >>> So are there any plans to create a JakartaEE-compatible version of > >>> Tapestry (either next to or instead of JavaEE) ? > >>> > >>> FWIW, in the Bootique project we decided to keep both JavaEE and > Jakarta > >>> options for at least the next major release. E.g. > >>> https://github.com/bootique/bootique-jetty < > >>> https://github.com/bootique/bootique-jetty> . But with every passing > >>> month, I am less inclined to keep supporting JavaEE :) > >>> > >>> Andrus > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org > >
