On Wednesday, January 22, 2025 7:28:56 AM Central European Standard Time
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Hi,
Hi *,
> we need to gather alignment on our approach to Jakarta Servlet. For
> discussions on the options please refer to the recent mail threads about
> this topic. There are pros and cons for
+1
Carsten
On 22.01.2025 07:28, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Hi,
we need to gather alignment on our approach to Jakarta Servlet. For
discussions on the options please refer to the recent mail threads about
this topic. There are pros and cons for every option, but this proposal
is msot likely the
+1
stefan
+1
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 07:30, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> The proposal is to:
> - target at least Jakarta Servlet 6 (depending on timing we might also
> go to Jakarta Servlet 6.1)
> - due to Jakarta Servlet 6, we increase the minimum required Java
> version to Java 17
> - duplicate all non de
+1
Am Mi., 22. Jan. 2025 um 07:30 Uhr schrieb Carsten Ziegeler <
cziege...@apache.org>:
> Hi,
>
> we need to gather alignment on our approach to Jakarta Servlet. For
> discussions on the options please refer to the recent mail threads about
> this topic. There are pros and cons for every option,
+1
Konrad
> On 22. Jan 2025, at 07:28, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we need to gather alignment on our approach to Jakarta Servlet. For
> discussions on the options please refer to the recent mail threads about this
> topic. There are pros and cons for every option, but this proposal
On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 07:28 +0100, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Please cast your votes.
+1 on the stated proposal.
Thanks,
Robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hi,
we need to gather alignment on our approach to Jakarta Servlet. For
discussions on the options please refer to the recent mail threads about
this topic. There are pros and cons for every option, but this proposal
is msot likely the best option for our users.
I think the best way way to g
