Jakarta EE Spec Committee - April 3rd, 2024
Attendees (present in bold):
Kenji Kazumura - Fujitsu
Emily Jiang - IBM - Tom Watson
Ed Bratt - Oracle - Dmitry Kornilov
Andrew Pielage - Payara - Petr Aubrecht
David Blevins - Tomitribe - Jean-Louis Monteiro, Cesar Hernandez
Ivar Grimstad - PMC Representative
Marcelo Ancelmo - Participant Member - Abraham Marin-Perez
Werner Keil - Committer Member
Jun Qian - Primeton Information Technologies - Enterprise Member
Zhai Luchao - Shandong Cvicse Middleware Co. - Enterprise Member
Guests - Jakarta EE 11 co-release coordinators: Ed Burns, Arjan Tijms
Eclipse Foundation: Tanja Obradovic, Wayne Beaton, Paul Buck (chair)
Past business / action items:
Agenda:
Check in on EE 11 Release Review ballots, see the spreadsheet for updates and notes.
[04/03] Unclear if the checklist is being followed as closely as needed, problems are being noted as ballots are underway, for example Interceptors had no CCR, problem rectified today by Scott Stark, could this situation have been prevented by following the checklist?
Mentors are encouraged to review the checklist prior to ballot and deal proactively with any exceptions.
[Late addition on the March, 20th agenda] The topics described in this email https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec.committee/msg03478.html were discussed in the call. It was proposed that publishing to Maven Central with the project license is acceptable. Note that given that the EFTL is not included in the file, the SHA and SIG sums would not be valid. Further investigation is needed. Topic to be revisited in the next committee call.
[04/03] Follow-up discussion
Discussion - The TCK team had a smaller precise set of questions that were discussed in the Platform Project call on April 2nd, these questions were asked and answered in that call.
Situation: TCK publishing to Maven Central vs the TCK available from the download site, if the SHA sum is the same this situation is likely acceptable, if the SHA sum does not match that is a problem. TCK RT, signature tests, documentation some of these artifacts are not required to execute the tests, and apparently not all TCK related artifacts published to Maven Central have licenses.
Proposal - It would be helpful to have an agreed to updates to the operations document from the Specification Committee that would be vetted by the EMO including legal questions, and added to the operations document. Where possible provide automated checking to see requirements are met. Ed Bratt to draft a proposal.
“No existing specifications are required to take any action, though each specification project is welcome to do a maintenance release to enable publication using the updated licenses should they choose. We will, however, begin insisting that both new specifications as well as new versions of existing specifications (other than service releases), to use the new versions of the licenses.”
This information has not reached the spec projects and projects are still releasing specifications under EFSL 1.0
I propose that the Jakarta EE Specification Committee allow this and encourage the license upgrade later after this has been properly communicated to all specification projects.
Outcome: Projects that are using EFSL 1.0 can continue to use it for EE 11, projects that can use EFSL 1.1 for EE 11 are encouraged but not required to do so. They will be required to do so in the future. Issue to be created to add this to the checklist.
The Platform call discussed and proposed to do a service release of the TCK, update spec in the next minor or major release to the spec. In this situation the TCK would for a period of time be out of sync with the specification. The committee accepts this proposal provided an issue to be opened to update the Batch specification.
PR to be merged.
