Jakarta Data 1.1 Plan Review

[njr-11]

Plan Review PR template

When creating a specification project plan review, create PRs with the content defined as follows.

Include the following in the PR:

• A directory in the form wombat/x.y where x.y is the release major.minor version.
• An index page wombat/x.y/_index.md following template
• Title should be on the form "Jakarta Wombat X.Y (under development)"
• Includes a plan for the release. Usually, a couple of statements is enough. Otherwise, a link to a document describing the release.
• Includes a detailed description of any backward incompatibility (Mark with N/A and check if none) N/A
• Declares optional features if there are any (Mark with N/A and check if none) N/A
• Includes minimum Java SE version
• Describe any updates or required changes including splitting out the TCK (Mark with N/A and check if not planned)
• Link to updated release record

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for jakartaee-specifications ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	2902156
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/jakartaee-specifications/deploys/6799132f4c15ae000868f78c
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-795--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[Emily-Jiang]

I don't think you can drop Java 17 in a minor release. What Java 21 feature did you use? If not, you can just update this. Otherwise, you need to remove that issues from the list.

[ivargrimstad]

I don't think you can drop Java 17 in a minor release. What Java 21 feature did you use? If not, you can just update this. Otherwise, you need to remove that issues from the list.

It is perfectly fine to do that in a minor release. This has been discussed over and over again in the platform call and always concluded with that.

[njr-11]

I am not aware of any Java 21-specific feature used.
I wrote 21 here because that is the minimum required Java SE level for Jakarta EE 12. At this point we have no guarantee that all of the Jakarta EE 12 specifications that we depend on will opt to continue supporting Java SE 17. It is also unclear what, if any, value there would be from Jakarta Data supporting Java SE 17 when the Jakarta EE 12 profiles and platform do not.

[Emily-Jiang]

I disagree with dropping SE 17 without any particular reason. It is irrelevant whether Jakarta EE 12 has the minimum version of SE 21 or not. The individual specs need to specify which SE do they support. As long as one spec has the minimum Java SE version to be 21, EE 12 has to be SE 21 based.

[ivargrimstad]

I disagree with dropping SE 17 without any particular reason. It is irrelevant whether Jakarta EE 12 has the minimum version of SE 21 or not. The individual specs need to specify which SE do they support. As long as one spec has the minimum Java SE version to be 21, EE 12 has to be SE 21 based.

If you disagree, you can vote -1 on the ballot. But remember it is not a perquisite for starting the ballot that the mentor agrees with everything in the plan. Just check that the materials are okay and has the quality it needs for a review to start.

[OndroMih]

I think there's a non-negligable impact on the TCK, @Emily-Jiang, if we keep Java 17. We would have to support Java 17, 21, and I suppose 25, if Jakarta EE 12 is aligned with 25. That makes one more Java version to support by the Data TCK. Maybe OK, maybe just unnecessary pain.

[Emily-Jiang]

@OndroMih For the CCRs, Data can just use Java 17. If EE 12 says, the minimum Java version is Java 21, Java 25. Only the ratifying impls need to get all TCKs to pass with Java 21 and Java 25. For all other impls, they can just choose either. For the runtime only supporting Jakarta Data 1.1, they could stay on Java 17.