Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Fork Eclipse MicroProfile Configuration as Ja

[Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx>]

It was discussed in both the steering and specification committees.
Bill Shanon ended up asking someone to take ownership of a fork, so we
did.

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 9:35 AM Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I don't think there has to be an unanimous decision in the Spec Committee, Steering Committee or any other relevant Jakarta EE body about that either, but these (and neither the subscribers to this list nor the MP one) have to make a decision when the time comes.
>
> Some decisions like the namespace (because at least Steve and a few others also mentioned that here) or acceptable namespaces I'd say should be made ASAP on the Jakarta EE side. If there was a decision that only "jakarta.*" was acceptable within the API and specs then this would certainly be a strong argument for either migrating specs in question or (as a last resort) fork them.
>
> Otherwise there should be enough time for the new MP WG if that's to be created soon to sort things out, apply the EFSP,
> try to address TCK problems and a few other issues that make it hard to accept it as it is into a future Jakarta EE release.
>
> Werner
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 4:24 PM Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Because none of the JSR330 spec leads responded in any form. There
>> clearly is a discussion going on here. When we had the MP pull vote it
>> was clearly stated that how Jakarta consumed MP specs was to be
>> defined on the Jakarta side. That is happening now. Why is it a
>> surprise that there is not a unanimous opinion?
>>