-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Coty,
On 2/10/20 8:37 AM, Coty Sutherland wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:48 AM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org > <mailto:ma...@apache.org>> wrote: > > Hi, > > I thought it would be useful to re-open the discussion on this. If > there is a better plan that the one we currently have I'd like to > try and find it. > > I'm happy to hold off on the current 10.0.0.0-M1 release for a few > days to give us time look for a better numbering scheme and so we > have the opportunity to pull the 10.0.0.0-M1 release if necessary. > > I have tried to express the various options I have seen proposed in > a similar way so we can compare them. If I have missed one or you > think of a different one then please post it. > > Option A: The current plan: Jakarta EE 9: 10.0.0.x Jakarta EE 10: > 10.0.x (x>=1) Jakarta EE 11: 11.0.x Java EE 8 : 9.y.x > (where y == major Tomcat version) > > > Option B: Continue with existing numbering Jakarta EE 9: 10.0.x > Jakarta EE 10: 11.0.x Jakarta EE 11: 12.0.x Java EE 8 : 9.y.x > (where y == major Tomcat version) > > > Option C: No stable Jakarta EE 9 release Jakarta EE 9: 10.0.0-Mx > Jakarta EE 10: 10.0.x Jakarta EE 11: 11.0.x Java EE 8 : 9.y.x > (where y == major Tomcat version) > > > Option D: Jakarta EE 9: 10.0.x Jakarta EE 10: 10.1.x Jakarta EE > 11: 11.0.x Java EE 8 : 9.y.x (where y == major Tomcat > version) > > > I think I prefer option A, with D as a secondary. Initially I liked > C the best, but given the conversation I agree that it's probably > not the best way forward. I think you have captured the essence of this conversation, here: > Either way we do it is going to be somewhat confusing for folks I > think, at least initially, but the options we have all seem pretty > easy to explain. Given that confusion is inevitable, let's go with the option that has the best steady-state outcome, which is option A -- where the Tomcat version lines-up with the Jakarta EE version number. Back when Tomcat 3/4/5 were released, the Java EE version numbering was unpredictable and it wasn't obvious that Tomcat versions followed various combinations of specifications. Now that Tomcat is essentially following a numbered-bundle of specs (e.g. "Jakarta EE 10") instead of collections of individual specs (Servlet, JSP, EL, WebSocket, JASPIC), it makes much more sense for our version numbers to b as easily-trackable as possible. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - https://www.enigmail.net/ iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEMmKgYcQvxMe7tcJcHPApP6U8pFgFAl5BcbcACgkQHPApP6U8 pFiQ8hAAnpUQ6xBi2x/MrcmlzjzvJvfJCHZ+KICaWvWuKoOXfk45iiuDzJZwWR0/ WKm5vZ2oDEmjQNSkqiaUHklCXm3lNNJ+/Epc1ikZ19cfoWo++KeyeQG995ePvED8 KPh7z5OtNaDaUi7ciJjKiORCJH4BtAlnBXlZBpcnTZ9I/YbRzQjSgYjeMPiUEDnY J5wQq/jNnutAiU1B4pzcFRGKw82yetA41isvGdyn3dLkWaSFzKAkQAbvGrOPrlER KuNrhJUgwCo7R9KAzzv58QSITn+kBt+3Y6CMAxRe65uOaozNEZJ7cPbf2fr3otSR UOB7m8sTYdHBsMEMKRbUw9Lw0SFRGHKWR5WxFam8JlvYcwQeQwnY3dj5MiDNZvoV ybeho0H61AWluZbmRgP/B9Ev3R2KhpEVwTJaDMJcy/dbXeogTONLVmqUesb6GhxA HC+pMlZV9Zqe4p7sdR2mBLjVNQYKiRKCOzPkRowzRS2kLrgsQLizn6tgDRjPwzSu UHWkFku3L1/5bufpESwv8UwVe875uqjkjPOQ6UvLlsErt4tSNWuaLRZxzaMHIGR2 lEs0FfvIfuLHtnmcA9cib4/gf80O9wI3dlyVM16qBLHwT+DGFb0qfDIG8Bt/oHg0 Q04Vs+nFSZ8wBVEbOmYrmg3O78KQeBRU1IB1TQVyikqBJTUybQc= =sXCR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
