Skip to content

Conversation

@tobixlea
Copy link
Contributor

@tobixlea tobixlea commented Jan 5, 2026

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:

  • Add aws-serverless-java-container-springboot4 module with Spring Framework 7.x support
  • Add aws-serverless-springboot4-archetype for project generation
  • Add 4 working Spring Boot 4.0 samples:
    • Basic pet-store: compatible and tested with java25 runtime
    • alt-pet-store: compatible and tested with java25 runtime
    • graphql-pet-store: compatible and tested with java25 runtime
    • pet-store-native: compatible and tested with java25 runtime
  • All samples tested and deployed successfully to AWS Lambda
  • Full compatibility with Jakarta EE 11 and Java 21 runtime
  • Update root pom.xml to include new modules"
  • removal of ${project.version} variable in archetype pom files in favor of explicit versioning

By submitting this pull request

  • I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
  • I confirm that I've made a best effort attempt to update all relevant documentation.

Copy link
Contributor

@bnusunny bnusunny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good overall. Please check the two comments I left.

@tobixlea tobixlea force-pushed the sjc-spring-boot-update branch 26 times, most recently from d7dd038 to 52fedb7 Compare January 16, 2026 21:52
@tobixlea tobixlea force-pushed the sjc-spring-boot-update branch 2 times, most recently from 80b787b to a5a34b5 Compare January 16, 2026 23:08
@tobixlea tobixlea force-pushed the sjc-spring-boot-update branch from a5a34b5 to b83323f Compare January 16, 2026 23:24
@tobixlea tobixlea requested a review from bnusunny January 20, 2026 18:22
<dependency>
<groupId>com.amazonaws.serverless</groupId>
<artifactId>aws-serverless-java-container-core</artifactId>
<version>${project.version}</version>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know how this worked, but if it was this sort of variable ${project.version} we might want to keep it like that, so it's easier in the future to update? (unless there's a reason to not do it, and it should be mentioned in the PR description)

(same in other pom.xml files).

@tobixlea tobixlea requested review from bnusunny and valerena January 28, 2026 18:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants