Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Agenda for the Jakarta EE Specification

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Ed and others,
I need to go back
to the original question that started this conversation...
On this
PR for Open Liberty 20.0.0.3 Compatibility,
the suggested change was to just replace the 19.0.0.6 reference with the
20.0.0.3 reference.  I didn't care for this since then it looks like
Open Liberty was not Jakarta EE 8 Compliant until the 20.0.0.3 release,
where in reality Open Liberty was compliant back when Jakarta EE 8 was
first released (19.0.0.6).

Thus, I am not
in favor of only listing the most current version on this Compatibility
page.  The idea of removing the version data altogether might be a
way to resolve this.  

Or, could we do
a fly-over or hover text or something similar for the "Compatible
Versions"?  So, instead of stating "Version: <version>"
under each Product, state something like "Compatible Versions"
and use the hover text capability to display the compatible versions?  Or,
I suppose this "Compatible Versions" could be hotlink to a separate
page that would include information on the compatible versions and associated
TCK Results.  If we went this latter route of a hotlink to a new page,
then we could remove the link for "proof of compatibility" since
it would be covered by this new page.

I wonder if we
need to open an Issue on this and collect these ideas there?  We could
some mock-ups of the various ideas like we did for the Specifications page.
 

---------------------------------------------------
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:
       Ed
Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       08/13/2020
10:28
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Agenda for the Jakarta EE Specification
Committee call August 12th, 2020

---

I don't know that all version details
need to be removed. In my opinion, this page is about brand adoption first
and foremost. Keeping some version detail is fine. I fear it could become
cluttered if this page is also used to maintain an archival record. I don't
really have an opinion about multiple links to the products -- product
page and/or download page. 
One other thing -- I was never thrilled
with the Java compliance page since it would tend to look sparse immediately
following the release of new major versions. To avoid that, I would recommend
the brand page not have a Jakarta EE version filter -- at least not at
the very top (perhaps this could be further down the page).
With respect these queries, I would include
both labels in any query like this ('certification' and 'accepted') --
unless one wants in-process, or other issues to be included in the results.
(I'm not sure if I pasted the correct link -- or if it was mangled by my
link-checker. Apologies if it was bunged up. Thank you Kevin for giving
the full link)
-- Ed
On 8/13/2020 8:05 AM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
Thanks, Ed.

Just to be clear on which github repository should be used, here's the
complete issue query:  
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-platform/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+label%3Aaccepted+label%3Acertification

Also, as an example, if you wanted to see which Platform certifications
existed for Open Liberty, you could modify the query as such:
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-platform/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed+label%3Aaccepted+label%3Acertification+%22Open+Liberty%22

If we wanted to include the first query somewhere on the Compatibility
Page, I'd be okay with that.  This would show all of the Platform
Certifications that have been accepted since the beginning.

Getting back to the question of Versions on the Compatibility Page...  If
I'm reading Ed's note correctly, are you advocating the removal of the
Version line altogether?  I could go along with that.  But, I
would like to have the product icons be hotlinks to the product pages.
 We should still have the [Download] link.  But, in addition,
it would be nice to easily get to the Product page.

---------------------------------------------------
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:        Ed
Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Paul Buck <paul.buck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        08/12/2020
13:17
Subject:        [EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Agenda for the Jakarta EE Specification
Committee call August 12th, 2020
Sent by:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

All Platform certification requests can be viewed with this issue
query (I needed two labels).
A query like this could  handle long-legacy inquiries and has the
benefit of always being up to date, and historically accurate. (Think for
example, if someone asked what version of Sun App. Server supported Java
EE 5, or J2EE 1.4 -- consider equivalent questions for Jakarta, far in
the future). 
The brand page may not be the best place for a complete detailed certification/version
history. 
My input is: The brand page really should focus on identifying vendors
who have adopted Jakarta EE. Rather than adding more details directly,
this kind of detail could be provided via an additional user action (i.e.
a roll-over, separate page, etc.) which would provide the additional details
about specific product and Jakarta versions. We already have the download
link which is direct to whatever the vendor wants to point at. I'd suggest
that version history is really a secondary use of that page and I'd relegate
this to avoid too much data clutter.
-- Ed

On 8/12/2020 6:48 AM, Paul Buck wrote:

The agenda for our committee call on Wednesday at 16:00 UTC is here.
Please update and add items as required. 

Zoom link - https://eclipse.zoom.us/j/102354706

Password: SpecCmte

Thanks ... Paul

_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To 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 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 unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee