Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] Ratified Implementations and special designation in the eyes of users

I saw that and commented there too.  Now we've got two conversations going.  It's ok :)

I see part of the motivation was to document the optional tests people pass.  The short version of my suggestion there is we should make that a requirement for the Public Test Results page.

Technically speaking the links we're using in the Compatible Implementations list was always intended to be the Public Test Results.  Perhaps the name I gave those in the process document was bad, but the intent was it  would serve as more informational download page the vendor could control and brand and be the link we used when we pointed to their certified product.

We should either start using them or perhaps abandon the concept to reduce complexity in our release process.

David Blevins

On Feb 10, 2021, at 11:19 AM, Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I guess that while you were writing this email, I came up with more or less the exact same proposal :)

But I like yours better, actually. Makes the list cleaner.


On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 8:12 PM David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I appreciate there was consensus on today's spec committee call to mark the implementation used for certification with a star.  We also commented that if we would alternate the time of the meeting, we should do more over email, so hopefully my feedback is welcome despite missing the meeting.

Can we find another way to document the implementations used for the vote?

I have many concerns about the concept of RIs.  A big one is the years of difficult experience competing against an implementation the public sees as special or more official than yours.  The fundamental tenant of Advance Implementation Neutrality is to make sure we're not doing that.

If we want to document the implementations used for the Release Review, can we simply include a link to the relevant CCRs in the "Release Review" section of the page?  It could be right under the vote totals after the text "The ballot was run in the mailing list.  The CCRs used for the ballot were: [link1] [link2]"

This would have it documented, but the list of implementations would look neutral and one would not stand out over the other.


_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Ivar Grimstad
Jakarta EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse Foundation
Eclipse Foundation - Community. Code. Collaboration. 
_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top