Ideally but that may introduce too many general EE4J release review dependencies so definitely for a 6.0.1. I think for the overall Jakarta EE 9 release I’ll avoid that as a hard requirement.
Steve
From: jakarta.ee-steering-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-steering-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Kevin Sutter
Sent: 21 October 2020 13:03
To: Jakarta EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-steering] [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
There *should* be finals for the CIs, but I'm sure there are still some laggers at this point. I would assume that before GF 6.0 goes final that you would require all of the
CIs to be final as well.
---------------------------------------------------
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: "Steve Millidge (Payara)" <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Jakarta EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/21/2020 06:57
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-steering] [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
Sent by: jakarta.ee-steering-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Can do, we have most of them but I was planning to do a final sweep. I will get it done in time for the usual Monday Jakarta EE TCK run.
Should there also be finals for each CI?
Steve
From:jakarta.ee-steering-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-steering-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Kevin Sutter
Sent: 21 October 2020 12:49
To: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-steering] [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
Steve,
Now that we're getting down to the wire, could your team make a final pass and update all of the remaining APIs? They should all be in staging by now (if you are pulling from staging). And, if you find any that are not yet available, then we should raise
that as an immediate issue. Thanks!
---------------------------------------------------
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: "Steve Millidge (Payara)" <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/21/2020 05:53
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] [jakarta.ee-steering] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
Sent by: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
From a GlassFish perspective some projects aren’t creating PRs to update GlassFish to the latest api and CI even though they are using it as their compatible implementation. The GlassFish team are reviewing
the poms periodically and doing the updates when we spot them, however we do have to check whether there is an updated version in staging to know an update is required. It is easier if projects make the PR to GlassFish proactively.
Steve
From:jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Kevin Sutter
Sent: 20 October 2020 23:24
To: Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Jakarta EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] [jakarta.ee-steering] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
Or, just put it directly into the Spec PR... My main point was to just let everyone know where we are at and, hopefully, avoid duplicate effort... Since everyone was asked
on the call to help out, if they could.
Concerning the use of the RC APIs for Glassfish... Are people actually verifying this when reviewing the ballots? I'm not... I'm assuming that the CI was using the appropriate API... I know this sounds like a potential hole, but this is getting complicated...
---------------------------------------------------
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 EE Steering Committee <jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/20/2020 16:40
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-steering] [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
OK, I just cloned the page that was in the GlassFish certifications folder from...
|
This Message Is From an External Sender
|
|
This message came from outside your organization.
|
|
|
|
OK, I just cloned the page that was in the GlassFish certifications folder from Jakarta EE 8. This page can be relocated or refreshed or not used -- however it's useful.
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/glassfish/pull/23249
Based on Arjan's comment, the convention would be that this page should be located in the JSP-API. There isn't a GH-Pages site for this repository though -- but the TCK Summary could just be a file in the repository. Or, leave it with GlassFish. Lots of options...
I think minimum work is to leave it with GlassFish.
For the TCK results:
1: we need to be sure Jakarta Pages 3.0.0 JAR is actually finished and is staged. I see the GitHub tag. I can't locate the staged API JAR. I may not be looking in the right place.
2: please double check the version pulled into GlassFish. It looks, to me, like GlassFish is still using an RC.
Once these are confirmed, we can generate the final TCK summary report.
-- Ed
(Kevin, perhaps we should bcc the committee lists and move this over to the jsp-dev list?)
On 10/20/2020 2:03 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote:
Fair clarification, Arjan. Thanks!
Whichever "vehicle" was used to do the actual testing, that's what we should put in the CR. Or, to be complete, we could indicate it's Glassfish RC1 (which contains JSP Impl 3.0.0). I, personally, would accept either one.
---------------------------------------------------
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: arjan tijms
<arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Jakarta specification committee
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jakarta EE Steering Committee
<jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/20/2020 15:52
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] JSP 3.0.0 is being taken care of...
Sent by: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 10:25 PM Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
One outstanding question is where to publicly post the TCK results? Any ideas or suggestions? As part of the Glassfish pages (we're using GF as the CI)? I can't find any "JSP Pages". Thanks!
Notice that GF itself is not the CI. GF includes the implementation "jakarta.servlet.jsp-3.0.0.jar", which is staged at
https://jakarta.oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/staging/org/glassfish/web/jakarta.servlet.jsp/3.0.0/
This is built from https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsp-api/tree/master/impl
So that would make that one the implementation, and GlassFish the vehicle. The Jakarta Tags and Jakarta _expression_ Language repos follow the same structure, but for instance Jakarta Security and Jakarta Rest do not.
Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms
---------------------------------------------------
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 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-steering mailing list
jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-steering
_______________________________________________
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-steering mailing list
jakarta.ee-steering@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-steering
