Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] June 9th date

[Ian Robinson <ian_robinson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

By the end of Weds
June 12th we mostly need to have agreed concrete next steps - but not necessarily
a concrete decision on BB/Incremental/variation. For example it might be
reasonable to recommend (as part of a June 12 checkpoint) identifying one
or two candidate Jakarta EE 9 specs (for which we need to have agreed a
Jakarta EE 9 theme that would motivate this choice) and use variations
of these specs to illustrate the consequences of an incremental approach
vs one that pre-reqs a BB reset. 

Based on some
of the other threads on this debate. the first reaction I'd expect to such
a suggestion would be "we'd need to execute a variation of BB to be
able to prototype a BB-dependent extension....". Yep. But apparently
that should only take a couple of minutes :). At the same time, if the
Jakarta EE 9 roadmap only touches a modest number of specs then that might
put BB/Inc in different (more concrete) perspective. 

Regards,
Ian





From:
       Werner
Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx>
To:
       Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       21/05/2019
23:23
Subject:
       Re:
[jakarta.ee-spec.committee] June 9th date
Sent
by:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Is it realistic to make a decision before the upcoming election?

 

Of Course the members who represent strategic vendors are likely to stay the same, but the others have to go through elections and where this may lead to changes new members could have an even harder time to make up their mind.

 

Werner

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: David Blevins
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 23:55
To: Jakarta specification committee
Subject: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] June 9th date

 

There was a statement that the June 9th date was optimistic.  It's really a defensive date with the assumption baked in that the community would not come to a clear agreement.  Bill captured it pretty accurately at the outset that if the community cannot come to an agreement in 2 weeks, it will never happen.  

 

 - Had we given 2 weeks, people would have spent the time complaining it wasn't enough time and directing javax frustration at us.

 

 - Had we given no date, we'd have left expectations open indefinitely and people would begin having discussions on how to wrap up the discussion, which would make two things people can't agree on.

 

The community has been prepped for us to take action after June 9th.  We should have an idea by the end of our Wednesday June 12th call what that action should be.

 

We do not need to unilaterally decide on a winning proposal, but we do at least need to spare the community from the "discussion on how to wrap up the discussion" discussion.  We will need to make a decision on how to take the conversation forward or to conclusion.

 

--

David Blevins

http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com

310-633-3852

 

 _______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU