| Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Presentation of Ballots for Release Reviews |
|
+1
From: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 07 August 2019 9:37 PM To: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Presentation of Ballots for Release Reviews Wayne,
Since we are allowing multiple repos per Specification Project, this voting of individual repo specifications may become more common. I think your proposed workaround is fine for now. But, we should log the need to modify the EFSP/JESP to allow for multiple specification releases within a single Specification Project. Thanks! --------------------------------------------------- Kevin Sutter STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office) LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter From: Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx> To: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 08/07/2019 03:29 PM Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Presentation of Ballots for Release Reviews Sent by: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx Wayne Beaton wrote on 8/7/19 12:59 PM: Greetings Jakarta EE Specification Committee, This is not the call for the ballot. Rather, this is a proposal for how the ballot will be presented. The JESP/EFSP requires a ballot on the release of each Specification Project. Jakarta Dependency Injection is one of two specifications "owned" by the Jakarta Contents and Dependency Injection Specification Project. I propose, that rather than wait for CDI, we push forward on this specification individually, with an understanding that the ballot for both this specification and for the CDI Specificationmust be completed successfully before the release review for the CDI Specification Project can be declared successful (i.e. one release review for the project, and one ballot for each specification). I think that this will be less confusing for the community. There's a mutual dependency here, right? The specification review can't be declared successful until the release review is complete, right? Regarding the content of the ballot request, I propose that the call for the ballot include links to the related PRs which contain all of the relevant information. The ballot request will look something like this: I need your vote to approve the Jakarta Dependency Injection 1.0 release. The relevant materials are available here: https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/63 https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/64 Per the process, this will be a fourteen day ballot, ending on August 22/2019. I require a Super-majority positive vote of the Specification Committee members. Community input is welcome, but only votes cast by Specification Committee Representatives will be counted. The Specification Committee is composed of representatives of the Jakarta EE Working Group Member Companies (Fujitsu, IBM, Oracle, Payara, Red Hat, Tomitribe), along with individuals who represent the EE4J PMC, Participant Members, and Committer Members. Do we have a public web site listing committee membership yet? If so, you could just point to it. Specification Committee representatives, your vote is hereby requested. Please respond with +1 (positive), 0 (abstain), or -1 (reject). Any feedback that you can provide to support your vote will be appreciated. Do we need anything else included in the ballot call? I'll send this out to the public list tomorrow. Let me know ASAP if you have any concerns. Looks good to me, thanks! _______________________________________________ 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 |