Hello team, Excellent work you're doing, I've been following the emails.
I'm sorry I couldn't participate actively when I did in the early days. I'm working on that. I'm just a bit lost and don't know what I could contribute. Regarding Jakarta Data, in my view, the fastest way is to use Hibernate, maybe create a module, if I'm not mistaken Tomee already has one. On Sun, Nov 23, 2025, 11:40 Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > From my perspective, there hasn’t been any outcome or consensus on this > matter yet. Several people were in favor of Hibernate, while a few had > reservations for specific reasons. However, there wasn’t much PMC > engagement on this thread. > > If I recall correctly, only Jon, Markus, and I commented, and no > consensus was reached. Since this is somewhat fundamental, I would have > appreciated a broader discussion and hearing more opinions from PMC > members to eventually reach a consensus on how to proceed. However, as > you may have noticed, the list hasn’t been very responsive lately, > which reinforces arguments like those made by Thomas that there isn’t > much manpower available right now (to implement an Apache Jakarta Data > implementation). > > Actually, it doesn’t matter at this stage (imho) since we are far from > pursuing any certification anyway. For this reason, we could build > TomEE 11 without integrating a Data implementation at all (at least for > now). While this wouldn’t be spec-compliant, it could be a viable > solution given that certification isn’t our current goal atm. In this > context, there would be no need to discuss the JPA implementation > shipped. > > From my perspective, the following areas need attention: > > (1) Fix the build on Java 21 – address the broken security manager > issues in case CXF decides to adopt Java 21 as a baseline. > Side note: MP 7+ requires a newer CXF version anyway due to the MP Rest > Client. > > (2) Implement the missing spec features in TomEE (concurency, security) > > (3) Consider upgrading MicroProfile to 7+ and update/fix the TCK > accordingly. If someone wants to work on MP 7+ separately, that’s fine, > though it might be challenging if other parts are currently broken. > Still, any progress toward EE 11 would be valuable. > > So, if anyone wants to jump in, feel free. I think we have a lot of > silent readers who would be happy to contribute to technical > discussions but don’t currently have the time to actively code. > > Hope it helps. > > Gruß > Richard > > > Am Sonntag, dem 23.11.2025 um 13:35 +0100 schrieb Skander Soltane: > > Hello Richard, > > > > > - Work has started on OpenJPA for JPA 3.2 on a separate branch / > > > repo, so > > not out to see in the original repo. I think, that help would be > > welcome on > > their side. > > Paulo updated the ticket with the current progress and features, which > need to be implemented here: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-2940 > > The code lives in OPENJPA-2940. So yes, they welcome contributions. > > > > > - We need to discuss how we want to deal with Jakarta Data (new > > > spec); > > would need to be implemented either as a separate project or in TomEE > > itself. > > > > Can I therefore interpret the outcome of the last discussion on this > > subject ([DISCUSS] Future of OpenJPA in TomEE 11 / EE 11 [1]) as > > continuing > > to use OpenJPA and implementing Jakarta Data either in a new Apache > > project > > or directly in TomEE? > > I am asking because I would like to help with this and with > > MicroProfile 7+, but I don't know if this type of discussion can be > > held in > > advance, > > particularly in parallel with this point: > > > > > - Next step on our side would be to start implementing the changes > > > for > > the specs (security, concurrency, …) which are implemented in TomEE > > itself. > > > > Thanks > > > > Skander > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/o8hydq47hvfhqorooql90hc4kf1rbqtk > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:10 PM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have just updated our CI build definitions, created tomee-10.x > > > and > > > merged ee11 into main, so the current development is reflected on > > > the main > > > part of the GitHub repo ;-) > > > > > > Gruß > > > Richard > > > > > > > Am 18.11.2025 um 13:37 schrieb Markus Jung <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > Hey David, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 for merging EE11 into the main branch. IMO a main branch > > > > is where > > > the main development happens and not some sort of stable branch, > > > with the > > > actual work happening being hidden away in a separate branch. In > > > its > > > current state it will obviously break the build. For me that's okay > > > since > > > TomEE 11 is still in its _very_ early stages. IMO fixing these > > > tests should > > > also be a higher priority than working on e.g. our > > > security/concurrency > > > implementations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Markus > > > > > > > > On 11/18/25 01:37, David Blevins wrote: > > > > > Thanks for this update, Richard. Thanks also Markus for the > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > > > What does everyone think about making this branch the main > > > > > branch? > > > > > > > > > > People looking for stable branches can easily find them. > > > > > People > > > looking to see activity in main can easily miss the branch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 16, 2025, at 12:18 AM, Richard Zowalla > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > Markus and myself started the work on EE11 on this branch: > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > What is currently done: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) Markus upgraded the EE API Shade to EE11. Notably, some > > > > > > APIs were > > > dropped that we still need in TomEE, so work was done to add those > > > APIs > > > back into TomEE (JAXB, etc.). > > > > > > 2. ) We are currently using a custom CXF fork based on Reta’s > > > > > > work on > > > CXF-8828 [2]. Similar to EE10, I forked his work branch and created > > > an > > > intermediate custom release until CXF provides something official. > > > The > > > forked code is available here: [3]. > > > > > > 3.) Although EE11 targets Java 17/21, the CXF team would like > > > > > > to > > > require Java 21. I’ve commented on that, but it would be great if > > > others > > > could also voice their preference for Java 17 over Java 21 as the > > > baseline. > > > > > > An alternative would be to adopt Java 21 as the baseline for > > > > > > TomEE 11: > > > [4]. Currently, the baseline on the ee11 branch is set to Java 21 > > > (as the > > > intermediate CXF fork did require it). > > > > > > 4.) Build looks good so far. The tests, which are failing > > > > > > right now, > > > are all related to the removal of the SecurityManager in Java 21. > > > The build > > > is here: [5] > > > > > > > > > > > > On our upstream dependencies: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Work has started on OpenJPA for JPA 3.2 on a separate > > > > > > branch / repo, > > > so not out to see in the original repo. I think, that help would be > > > welcome > > > on their side. > > > > > > - CXF has also started working on EE11 (see above) > > > > > > - OWB also started for the CDI part. > > > > > > - MyFaces is already EE 11 ready (afaik) > > > > > > > > > > > > What needs to be done: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Next step on our side would be to start implementing the > > > > > > changes for > > > the specs (security, concurrency, …) which are implemented in TomEE > > > itself. > > > > > > - We need to discuss how we want to deal with Jakarta Data > > > > > > (new spec); > > > would need to be implemented either as a separate project or in > > > TomEE > > > itself. > > > > > > - Look into MicroProfile 7+ upgrades ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > More updates will follow as the work progresses. > > > > > > Feedback, testing, and comments are very welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > Gruß > > > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/tomee/tree/ee11 > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/reta/cxf/tree/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/rzo1/cxf/tree/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [5] https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/tomee11-full/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7+, but I don't know if this type of discussion can be held in > > advance, > > particularly in parallel with this point: > > > > > - Next step on our side would be to start implementing the changes > > > for > > the specs (security, concurrency, …) which are implemented in TomEE > > itself. > > > > Thanks > > > > Skander > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/o8hydq47hvfhqorooql90hc4kf1rbqtk > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:10 PM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have just updated our CI build definitions, created tomee-10.x > > > and > > > merged ee11 into main, so the current development is reflected on > > > the main > > > part of the GitHub repo ;-) > > > > > > Gruß > > > Richard > > > > > > > Am 18.11.2025 um 13:37 schrieb Markus Jung <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > Hey David, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 for merging EE11 into the main branch. IMO a main branch > > > > is where > > > the main development happens and not some sort of stable branch, > > > with the > > > actual work happening being hidden away in a separate branch. In > > > its > > > current state it will obviously break the build. For me that's okay > > > since > > > TomEE 11 is still in its _very_ early stages. IMO fixing these > > > tests should > > > also be a higher priority than working on e.g. our > > > security/concurrency > > > implementations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Markus > > > > > > > > On 11/18/25 01:37, David Blevins wrote: > > > > > Thanks for this update, Richard. Thanks also Markus for the > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > > > What does everyone think about making this branch the main > > > > > branch? > > > > > > > > > > People looking for stable branches can easily find them. > > > > > People > > > looking to see activity in main can easily miss the branch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -David > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 16, 2025, at 12:18 AM, Richard Zowalla > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > Markus and myself started the work on EE11 on this branch: > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > What is currently done: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) Markus upgraded the EE API Shade to EE11. Notably, some > > > > > > APIs were > > > dropped that we still need in TomEE, so work was done to add those > > > APIs > > > back into TomEE (JAXB, etc.). > > > > > > 2. ) We are currently using a custom CXF fork based on Reta’s > > > > > > work on > > > CXF-8828 [2]. Similar to EE10, I forked his work branch and created > > > an > > > intermediate custom release until CXF provides something official. > > > The > > > forked code is available here: [3]. > > > > > > 3.) Although EE11 targets Java 17/21, the CXF team would like > > > > > > to > > > require Java 21. I’ve commented on that, but it would be great if > > > others > > > could also voice their preference for Java 17 over Java 21 as the > > > baseline. > > > > > > An alternative would be to adopt Java 21 as the baseline for > > > > > > TomEE 11: > > > [4]. Currently, the baseline on the ee11 branch is set to Java 21 > > > (as the > > > intermediate CXF fork did require it). > > > > > > 4.) Build looks good so far. The tests, which are failing > > > > > > right now, > > > are all related to the removal of the SecurityManager in Java 21. > > > The build > > > is here: [5] > > > > > > > > > > > > On our upstream dependencies: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Work has started on OpenJPA for JPA 3.2 on a separate > > > > > > branch / repo, > > > so not out to see in the original repo. I think, that help would be > > > welcome > > > on their side. > > > > > > - CXF has also started working on EE11 (see above) > > > > > > - OWB also started for the CDI part. > > > > > > - MyFaces is already EE 11 ready (afaik) > > > > > > > > > > > > What needs to be done: > > > > > > > > > > > > - Next step on our side would be to start implementing the > > > > > > changes for > > > the specs (security, concurrency, …) which are implemented in TomEE > > > itself. > > > > > > - We need to discuss how we want to deal with Jakarta Data > > > > > > (new spec); > > > would need to be implemented either as a separate project or in > > > TomEE > > > itself. > > > > > > - Look into MicroProfile 7+ upgrades ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > More updates will follow as the work progresses. > > > > > > Feedback, testing, and comments are very welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > Gruß > > > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/tomee/tree/ee11 > > > > > > [2] https://github.com/reta/cxf/tree/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [3] https://github.com/rzo1/cxf/tree/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-8828 > > > > > > [5] https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/tomee11-full/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
