Hello Markus, So how would you sort the priorities ? Starting with the 4 components directly written in TomEE ?
Thanks Skander On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:17 AM Markus Jung <ju...@apache.org> wrote: > Hey Skander, > > nice, that ticket is already a great start! I’ll create a 11.0.0 release > in jira and assign that ticket to it. > > Speaking about hibernate there has been a thread about in already in early > 2023 with some mixed opinions when TomEE 10 was still in the making ( > https://lists.apache.org/thread/5gzmhjsmhndmncdh70l82q0fnmxlm865). IMO we > should probably start another seperate discussion thread for this topic > when we’re ready to worry about our JPA/Jakarta Data implementation. > > Regarding MP I think it just has a minimum requirement of EE 10, so we can > of course use newer versions with EE 11. However IIRC we were bound to 6.1 > because CXF postponed updating their MP Rest Client implementation to > 4.2.x. Speaking for myself I would not put a too high priority on it just > yet, but we should keep it in mind and maybe try to move to the latest > possible version in the process of creating TomEE 11. > > > Thanks > Markus > > > On 18. Sep 2025, at 08:34, Skander Soltane <mskandersolt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I’ve created this ticket < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-4530> > > and I hope it’s clear enough. Please let me know if anything needs > > improvement or if I overlooked a component. > > > > Could someone create a new release version (11.0.0) and update the fix > > version of the ticket accordingly? > > > > I’m not entirely sure if this thread is meant for discussing the future > of > > TomEE 11, but since there are some important decisions to make, I’ll > > outline them here: > > > > 1. > > > > Jakarta Data – Switching to Hibernate 7 could resolve this, especially > > since I couldn’t find any Apache implementation. Eclipse provides one, > and > > I believe OpenLiberty is working on theirs. If we decide not to switch > to > > Hibernate 7, we’ll need to provide our own implementation. > > 2. > > > > MicroProfile 7.0 – I didn’t mention any MP components in the ticket, > but > > according to the MP website, even the latest version still refers to > > Jakarta EE 10 as the core platform. Does this mean it’s not yet > compatible > > with EE 11? Should we first focus on upgrading Jakarta EE components, > and > > then consider MicroProfile in a minor release of TomEE 11(e.g. 11.1.0)? > > > > > > Thanks > > Skander > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:07 PM Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Feel free to open that ticket in Jira. Every registered user should be > >> allowed to create tickets. > >> > >> It should of course include the information provided by Markus as well > as > >> the required spec updates. > >> > >> Gruß > >> Richard > >> > >> > >>> Am 16.09.2025 um 13:54 schrieb Skander Soltane < > >> mskandersolt...@gmail.com>: > >>> > >>> Hello Richard, > >>> > >>> This would be great. > >>> > >>> Can I volunteer to create this ticket or at least the content if I > don’t > >>> have the right access. > >>> > >>> I want to familiarize myself with the process of releasing a new major, > >> so > >>> I may ask some newbie questions. > >>> > >>> This is very exciting news, given that we have a new component : > Jakarta > >>> Data 1.0 > >>> > >>> Skander > >>> > >>> On Tue 16 Sep 2025 at 13:48, Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> I’d like to propose that we start work on a Jakarta EE 11 API shade in > >>>> https://github.com/apache/tomee-jakartaee-api (create a ee10 branch, > >> move > >>>> main to e11 and do a first milestone release) > >>>> > >>>> This would give us a solid baseline to begin the upgrade path from > TomEE > >>>> 10.1.x to TomEE 11. > >>>> > >>>> In addition, we should create a ticket that documents all the > >>>> specification differences between Jakarta EE 10 and 11. That way we > can > >>>> clearly see what changes are required and identify where updates or > >>>> enhancements are needed in the TomEE codebase. > >>>> > >>>> This is not about TCKs at this stage (since that remains a larger > >>>> challenge we couldn’t fully tackle with TomEE 10), but rather about > >> getting > >>>> a clear picture of the work ahead and aligning on the upgrade path. > >>>> > >>>> WDYT? > >>>> > >>>> Richard > >> > >> > >
