Markus KARG

@quiram So here is the definitive authoritative answer of the SemVer team: https://github.com/semver/semver/issues/946#issuecomment-1553261056. Hence we MAY increase major version without any actual need. SemVer does not prohibit that.

Unfortunately your poll was vaguely phrased. If you need a clear answer then the question must be unambiguous and closed, like "Does SemVer forbid increasing MAJOR in case there is...

There is no conflict, so I cannot trying to win it; I already explained what my targets are and will not repeat, as we come into a loop simply, which...

> Hello @mkarg nice to see you again. As it happens, the EE Specification committee is hard at work revising the backward compatibility requirements right now. I expect they'll have...

If there is a wishlist, I would be very glad if we could include https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jersey/pull/5341.

I wonder why this issue is still open, as apparently the intended work is done in Jersey 3.1.6+

@jansupol I would propose that I set up a test environment so I can check Alan's ideas. Regarding performance I do not see where this is in the critical path....

Actually the question was unrelated to any issues.

Thank you, Maxim, for chiming in. So to sum up, the answer is: Jersey has no reliable cross-vendor behavior when it comes to the above questions. This is good to...

Certainly this is a feature request but not a bug report. ;-) I do not agree that handling HTTP/2 streams is the job of a *higher* level framework. Jersey itself...