Emmanuel Bernard Yes, for sure we will need to specify JTA transitively. The question is really about (1) which JTA GAV to use and (2) how to expose it. For the second there really is not an option I believe, as this is not something Maven POMs offer an option for (recognizing that all these JTA GAVs are really just different "names" for the same artifact). For the first, this is my personal order of preference:

1. org.apache.geronimo.specs:geronimo-jta_1.1_spec - this is the one we have transitively "exported" for a while now. That continuity is good in terms of exclusions.
2. javax.transaction:jta - given that there is not a valid forgotten reason we did not use that in the first place. I guess I could be argued into this being the first option too

Additionally we moved away from org.jboss.spec.javax.transaction:jboss-transaction-api_1.2_spec due to bugs in their OSGi metadata. I don't see a compelling reason to go back to that one.