I think you're the better person to have, Kevin. You can and are attending all the meetings, are in a much better position to discuss with everyone and I respect your insights.
-- David Blevins 310-633-3852
Since Dan and I are
both from IBM, I'm happy to give my representation to David. It would
be good to have multiple organizations represented in this review committee.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)From:
Wayne
Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>To:
Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>Date:
06/17/2021
14:58Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] An update to the Eclipse Foundation Specification
ProcessSent
by: "jakarta.ee-spec.committee"
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for volunteering, David.
However, I already have two representatives from the Jakarta EE Working
Group's Specification Committee. I will ask those representatives to coordinate
the communication of the Jakarta EE Working Group's interest with the rest
of the Specification Committee.Every change is being tracked by an issue
or by pull request. Everybody is welcome to comment directly on the issues.WayneOn Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:51 PM David
Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:Hi Wayne,I'd also like to volunteer.
-- David Blevinshttp://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com310-633-3852On Jun 17, 2021, at 11:08 AM, Wayne Beaton
<wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:Greetings Jakarta EE Specification Committee.As we discussed previously, I've started
work on a new revision of the EFSP.My primary interest is to focus
the EFSP itself more on the intellectual property flows and less on prescribing
the specific nature of specifications themselves. As we apply the process
to other domains, and indeed within the Jakarta EE specification space
itself, we're finding that much of our earlier understanding just doesn't
apply generally.Note that rolling out a new version
of the EFSP does not automatically impose anything on specification committees
already engaged in a specification process. Following the approval of a
new version of the EFSP, the specification committee will have an
opportunity to adopt the new process and integrate it into their own.I'm tracking the effort in a GitHub board.
A diff of the work-in-progress is here.I invite all members of the specification
committee to add their comments on the open issues and create new issues
if there are specific things that you believe need to be addressed. Pull
requests are welcome.I'm assembling a committee with representatives
from each of the working groups engaged in specification development to
produce this update. My intent is to set up a one hour meeting as soon
as I have representatives from each working group to go over what I've
done with the draft so far. Dan and Kevin have volunteered to represent
the interests of the Jakarta EE specification committee. Thanks,
Wayne
-- Wayne
BeatonDirector
of Open Source Projects | Eclipse
Foundation_______________________________________________
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-- Wayne
Beaton
_______________________________________________ jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxxTo unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
|
