I would just call it Tapestry 6.x. It's not going to be compatible with any
previous version, or even with previous servlet containers. I well know the
history ("there will never be Tapesty 6") but past is past, there's no good
reason to avoid a new major, semantic version to indicate the differenc
I agree with Kalle. It's a big breaking change (all dependencies have to be
compatible with JakartaEE too, for example Spring Framework), I would
sum +1 to the major version in favour of 6.x.
On the other hand, thank you for your work with the framework and the
migration to Jakarta EE.
Best Regar
Am 01.08.24 um 10:36 schrieb Kalle Korhonen:
I would just call it Tapestry 6.x. It's not going to be compatible with any
previous version, or even with previous servlet containers. I well know the
history ("there will never be Tapesty 6") but past is past, there's no good
reason to avoid a new ma
I agree with Kalle and others, call it 6. Permanently locking the version
at 5 was always a bad idea, in my opinion.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024, 6:04 AM Andreas Ernst wrote:
> Am 01.08.24 um 10:36 schrieb Kalle Korhonen:
> > I would just call it Tapestry 6.x. It's not going to be compatible with
> any
Hello, Kall, Carlos and Bob!
I appreciate and respect your suggestions, but I'm afraid going to Tapestry
6 is not happening. We already had a bunch of classes moved from one
package to another or even to new packages and we just went to 5.6 to 5.7.
The framework name is Tapestry 5. It's even in th
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:46 AM Carlos Montero Canabal <
carlosmonterocana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On the other hand, thank you for your work with the framework and the
> migration to Jakarta EE.
>
The migration to Jakarta EE should be thanked by derkoe (I know his name,
but he never posted it here
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 7:35 AM Bob Harner wrote:
> I agree with Kalle and others, call it 6. Permanently locking the version
> at 5 was always a bad idea, in my opinion.
>
I believe the locking ended up being forced on the project by Tapestry 5
not getting a different name when it was first intr
Hi Thiago
I like 5.18. I am even happy with 5.9 because I think committing to
producing new major releases in the javax branch sounds like a lot of
work. If people want the features of a new release they can migrate to
jakarta. It is not like they can avoid that migration for ever. If they
do
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 6:41 PM D Tim Cummings
wrote:
> Hi Thiago
>
Hello!
> I like 5.18. I am even happy with 5.9 because I think committing to
> producing new major releases in the javax branch sounds like a lot of
> work.
Thanks for your input! Actually, I expect keeping the jakarta and ja
