Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] ballot initiation inconsistency

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, I'll go along
with that.
https://github.com/jakartaee/specification-committee/pull/24


---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:
       Scott
Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       01/09/2020
09:50
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] ballot initiation inconsistency
Sent
by:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

The first is talking about votes
in general, which includes non-spec
project related votes of the spec committee. The latter is the current
procedure as steps taken after the PRs are approved. I think the EMO
has to initiate the ballot for final project releases. We should just
clarify that the steps of PR approval and then EMO request are an
ordered sequence.

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 9:36 AM Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> On yesterday's call, there was much discussion about how a ballot
should be initiated.  Should the project team contact the emo to initiate
the ballot?  Or, should the project team first work through the Spec
committee and then based on that discussion, the emo can be contacted?
 As I was reviewing the Operation  Guidefor other matters, I
came across an inconsistency.
>
> In the Specification Committee section, there is the following statement:
>
> "The Specification Chair (or their delegate) is responsible for
initiating ballots, tallying their results, disseminating them to the community,
and (when appropriate; e.g., in the case a release review ballot) reporting
them to the EMO."
>
> But, in the Voting section, there are the following two bullets:
>
> The project team contacts the EMO to initiate the review by sending
an email to emo@xxxxxxxxxxx.
> The EMO initiates a specification committee ballot by sending an email
on the public Jakarta EE Specification Committee (jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx)
mailing list that describes the nature of the vote (creation/progress/release)
and includes pointers to the PR request containing the proposed release
content (e.g. release review document, specification document, and technical
artifacts).
>
>
> So, I can see where there was confusion as to who should initiate
the reviews and ballots.  I want to leave the responsibilities with
the project team.  They are the ones that know the details about whether
they are ready for a review or ballot.  That would be consistent with
the EDP as well.  But, maybe we need to add another item that the
project team needs to engage with the Spec Committee and/or Platform Project
before starting a review or ballot?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Kevin Sutter
> STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
> e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
> phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
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