Revert "Update version to 2.1 and set to JDK 11 as minimum"

[Emily-Jiang]

This reverts commit 2e38858aaf09f12a0090dcfb13caeeef1e900c03.

[arjantijms]

There seems to have been a mismatch in requests, master first got updated with a Jakarta EE 10 dependency by @manovotn, so it naturally needed to be 2.1 there. See https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api/commit/9d3da66c7d32051ea80167f7958769c7d0a20a02 that added

<groupId>jakarta.annotation</groupId>
<artifactId>jakarta.annotation-api</artifactId>
<version>2.1.0-B1</version>

Then additionally @starksm64 added a module-info.java in https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api/commit/b9b90bdff84258de855701c021858e4a03d67d23

Then a 2.1 milestone was requested including the 2.1.0-B1 annotations dependency, and then additionally a 2.0.1 milestone was requested including only the module-info.java.

It looks like these two have now been mixed up, as this PR creates a 2.0.1 with a Jakarta EE 10 dependency.

[starksm64]

Yes, the inclusion of the dependency on the 2.1.0-B1 annotations does cause problems in terms of a service release since that requires Java 11. We need to discuss whether there needs to be an interceptors 2.1 release and release plan. In the meantime, a 2.0.1 service release unblocks other projects that need to perform service releases for the module-info addition.

[arjantijms]

@starksm64

In the meantime, a 2.0.1 service release unblocks other projects that need to perform service releases for the module-info addition.

Yes, absolutely. So we need that 2.0.1 service release anyway, but then without the 2.1.0-B1 annotations. We then have to discuss whether there's optionally a 2.1 needed.

My apologies for initially misunderstanding this.

So the first course of action I think would be to revert the 2.1.0-B1 annotations commit as well, then re-stage a 2.0.1 Interceptors.

[Emily-Jiang]

I thought the inclusion of the dependency on the 2.1.0-B1 annotations is required by CDI 4.0. Please can Matej or LT confirm? Thanks Emily

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 5:11 PM Arjan Tijms @.***> wrote:

@starksm64 https://github.com/starksm64

In the meantime, a 2.0.1 service release unblocks other projects that need to perform service releases for the module-info addition.

Yes, absolutely. So we need that 2.0.1 service release anyway, but then without the 2.1.0-B1 annotations. We then have to discuss whether there's optionally a 2.1 needed.

My apologies for initially misunderstanding this.

So the first course of action I think would be to revert the 2.1.0-B1 annotations commit as well, then re-stage a 2.0.1 Interceptors.

— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api/pull/93#issuecomment-981119694, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACT5PZBYYEYGTV3VJ2F5PZTUOJPEPANCNFSM5IUTII6Q . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

-- Thanks Emily

[starksm64]

The the 2.1.0-B1 annotations is not needed because it can and is be included explicitly by CDI rather than via transitive dependencies. The bigger question is whether it is worth the trouble of creating a release plan just to update the transitive dependencies. Maybe that can be done in parallel to the service release. We can discuss on the platform call.

[Emily-Jiang]

Indeed CDI 4.0 needs Annotations 2.1.

LT

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:59 PM Emily Jiang via cdi-dev < @.***> wrote:

I thought the inclusion of the dependency on the 2.1.0-B1 annotations is required by CDI 4.0. Please can Matej or LT confirm? Thanks Emily

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 5:11 PM Arjan Tijms @.***> wrote:

@starksm64 https://github.com/starksm64

In the meantime, a 2.0.1 service release unblocks other projects that need to perform service releases for the module-info addition.

Yes, absolutely. So we need that 2.0.1 service release anyway, but then without the 2.1.0-B1 annotations. We then have to discuss whether there's optionally a 2.1 needed.

My apologies for initially misunderstanding this.

So the first course of action I think would be to revert the 2.1.0-B1 annotations commit as well, then re-stage a 2.0.1 Interceptors.

— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api/pull/93#issuecomment-981119694, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACT5PZBYYEYGTV3VJ2F5PZTUOJPEPANCNFSM5IUTII6Q . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

-- Thanks Emily

---

cdi-dev mailing list @.*** To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev

[tkburroughs]

Creating an Interceptors 2.1 for Jakarta EE 10 would have a ripple effect, as that would also require EJB to have a 4.1, just so it could declare a dependency on Interceptors 2.1. Are there any other specifications that also have a dependency on Interceptors 2.0?

-- Tracy Burroughs @.***) -- WebSphere Application Server Development -- IBM Rochester, Dept WG8A H315/050-2 -- 2800 37th Street NW, Rochester MN 55901-4441

From: "Emily Jiang" @.> To: "eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api" @.> Cc: "Subscribed" @.***> Date: 11/29/2021 02:19 AM Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api] Revert "Update version to 2.1 and set to JDK 11 as minimum" (PR #93)

Indeed CDI 4.0 needs Annotations 2.1. LT On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:59 PM Emily Jiang via cdi-dev < @.***> wrote: > I thought the inclusion of the dependency on the 2.1.0-B1 annotations is > required by CDI 4.0. Please can ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Indeed CDI 4.0 needs Annotations 2.1.

LT

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:59 PM Emily Jiang via cdi-dev < @.***> wrote:

I thought the inclusion of the dependency on the 2.1.0-B1 annotations is required by CDI 4.0. Please can Matej or LT confirm? Thanks Emily

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 5:11 PM Arjan Tijms @.***> wrote:

@starksm64 https://github.com/starksm64

In the meantime, a 2.0.1 service release unblocks other projects that need to perform service releases for the module-info addition.

Yes, absolutely. So we need that 2.0.1 service release anyway, but then without the 2.1.0-B1 annotations. We then have to discuss whether there's optionally a 2.1 needed.

My apologies for initially misunderstanding this.

So the first course of action I think would be to revert the 2.1.0-B1 annotations commit as well, then re-stage a 2.0.1 Interceptors.

— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/interceptor-api/pull/93#issuecomment-981119694> , or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACT5PZBYYEYGTV3VJ2F5PZTUOJPEPANCNFSM5IUTII6Q>

. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS < https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>

or Android < https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub> .

-- Thanks Emily

---

cdi-dev mailing list @.*** To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.