Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Convert package from javax to jakarta #253

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jan 13, 2020
Merged

Conversation

Cousjava
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Coustick <jonathan.coustick@payara.fish>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Coustick <jonathan.coustick@payara.fish>
@m0mus
Copy link
Contributor

m0mus commented Jan 13, 2020

Fixes #254

Copy link
Contributor

@m0mus m0mus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@m0mus m0mus merged commit 539b6c5 into jakartaee:master Jan 13, 2020
@bshannon
Copy link

This doesn't seem to use the new ee4j parent pom. Did you find that was unnecessary?

@m0mus
Copy link
Contributor

m0mus commented Jan 13, 2020

It was created before new parent pom was released. Uptaking new parent pom can be done in another PR.

@arjantijms
Copy link
Contributor

Should the new version be 3.0-SNAPSHOT or 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT?

@m0mus
Copy link
Contributor

m0mus commented Jan 13, 2020

I guess 3.0-SNAPSHOT

@arjantijms
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that the Jakarta EE platform spec is 8.0.0 vs 8.0 that Java EE used before, and GlassFish was now asked to move to 6.0.0, hence I wondered if the x.0.0 might be a new recommendation for version numbers.

@m0mus
Copy link
Contributor

m0mus commented Jan 13, 2020

There were no recommendations from PMC, so IMO no changes is the right approach. If it needs to be discussed please post a question to the PMC mailing list.

@arjantijms
Copy link
Contributor

Okay, I'm not particularly in favour of the x.0.0 scheme, but was more wondering whether it was a recommendation or not. Thanks!

@t1
Copy link

t1 commented Jan 14, 2020

Isn't semver a good versioning scheme also for Jakarta EE? Every version part would have a quite clear message: The Bad, The Good, and The Ugly 😉

@bshannon
Copy link

@m0mus @arjantijms
I'm not sure what we're talking about the version of here so let me give the general rule...

Programming artifacts, e.g., jar files full of class files, zip files containing an implementation for download, etc. always have dot-dot version numbers, even when the minor and micro numbers are zero.

Specification documents have single-dot version numbers, with an optional "rev level" indicating an errata update to the document.

So, if you're talking about the API jar file, it should be 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.

If you're talking about the Jakarta Messaging specification document, it should be 3.0-SNAPSHOT. If you have to fix a typo after 3.0 is released, the new version would be 3.0-RevA. (We could argue about the capitalization.)

@arjantijms
Copy link
Contributor

So, if you're talking about the API jar file, it should be 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT

So what you’re saying is that the version in the Pom here should be set to 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT after all?

@smillidge
Copy link

yes 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT for api jars 3.0 for the spec version

@bshannon
Copy link

So, if you're talking about the API jar file, it should be 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT

So what you’re saying is that the version in the Pom here should be set to 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT after all?

Yes. Is that still confusing? How can I describe this so it's less confusing?

@arjantijms
Copy link
Contributor

Yes. Is that still confusing? How can I describe this so it's less confusing?

No, it's super clear. My OCD kicked in for a moment ;)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants