Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] [External] : DISCUSS: Approval to release WebSocke

[Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Kenji

Thank you for withdrawing and restarting the ballot. The problem wasn't the CCR, it was that the TCK had been rebuilt/changed.

-- Ed

On 4/14/2024 3:29 PM, Kenji Kazumura (Fujitsu) wrote:

Historically there were sometimes CCR was updated during ballot.

But I agree that the materials for ballots should not be changed during ballot.

So I will withdraw this ballot.

 

-Kenji Kazumura

 

 

From: jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Ed Bratt via jakarta.ee-spec
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2024 1:00 AM
To: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] [External] : DISCUSS: Approval to release WebSocket 2.2

 

I'm really not sure what to do with this. The TCK download issue appears to have been corrected. That's good. 

Unfortunately,  somewhere along the way the TCK was revised, and now the SHA hash for the archive that is available for download, does not match the sum recorded by the CI for validation. 

• WebSocket TCK as of today

• 5bb92094db8d46f60f561e0bcb81146b4802072abc39ce059bb69a63b310d3e2c970ebf8b1a5fbcc97f8410f4d05918ac2b21c847d89af027e9191d0e7e45a20

• As reported in the the Tomcat CCR (and their supporting summary page)

• 3284c6f45193a5f5e34b8bb9c65e222b6a35dd66a9c141466c0e35f36a7fb88ed9f7b498eb2688aa3d5be852a356bfc5165b9c49b5a17331ce99658cf2ad4d31

Regretfully, it is not possible confirm that the TCK used for this CI compatibility validation is the TCK that we are using for the ballot. (And I am certain that the CI team performed these tests with every intention to follow the process.)

On the one hand, updating the CCR and Results tracking page to reflect the currently posted TCK will resolve the issue I raise here. However, that seems, at least to me, to invalidate, or at least bring to question, the ballot votes already cast. The materials for the ballot are not supposed to change, during the ballot cycle. As I understand it, the only "proper" way to address this would be to withdraw the current ballot; Update all the associated documentation; then start it again.

The ballot, as it stands has received sufficient positive votes to pass however I'm still uncomfortable voting, due to these documentation and consequential process issues.

I am good with the Specification, the new Spec. landing page, the TCK and it's content (the TCK available, today) but the process and validating documentation aren't correct and changing them could involve resetting the ballot.

My recommendation would be to withdraw this current ballot. Request the Tomcat team to rerun the tests and update the supporting data. With that, start the ballot over. Perhaps we could close it in 7 days if everyone is primed and ready to cast their vote.

-- Ed Bratt

On 4/1/2024 10:25 AM, Ed Bratt via jakarta.ee-spec wrote:

Kenji

Mirror problems appear to be corrected. Apparently, there were some time-out problems with the mirror copy tasks on some mirrors.

Thanks for checking.

-- Ed

On 3/30/2024 3:32 AM, Kenji Kazumura (Fujitsu) via jakarta.ee-spec wrote:

Hi,

 

It seems that the TCP zip file was updated. The zip file which I downloaded 2 days ago and the one which I download today are binary different.

I ask websocket team to update CCR.

 

But I don’t have a problem with mirroring issue.

I download zip files from four locations today, but all the check sums are same.

 

United States - University of Maryland

Canada - Rafal Rzeczkowski

Netherlands - LiteServer

United States - Clarkson University Open Source Institute

 

-Kenji Kazumura

 

 

From: Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2024 7:43 AM
To: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Kazumura, Kenji <kzr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [External] : [jakarta.ee-spec] DISCUSS: Approval to release WebSocket 2.2

 

Hi,

I am unable to verify the SHA-SUMs of the TCK. I have raised this with Kenjii and I've also filed an Eclipse ticket since the sums I get don't match, even across different mirror servers. Anyone interested can have a look at this ticket. I'll note that this specification seems to be linking through the Eclipse mirroring infrastructure and, I don't think any of the other specifications currently on ballot have used that service.

I can't vote on this since I can't review the TCK. (Well, I could look at a TCK but I have no way to verify that what I'm looking at, is the actual, final, TCK.)

-- Ed

On 3/28/2024 6:09 PM, Kenji Kazumura (Fujitsu) via jakarta.ee-spec wrote:

I'm sorry. Subject is changed.

-----Original Message-----

From: jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Kenji

Kazumura (Fujitsu) via jakarta.ee-spec

Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 10:04 AM

To: 'jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx' <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Cc: Kazumura, Kenji <kzr@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject: [jakarta.ee-spec] BALLOT: Approval to release [SPECIFICATION NAME]

[VERSION]

Greetings Jakarta EE Specification Committee.

I need your vote to approve and ratify the release of Jakarta WebSocket 2.2.0 as part of

the Jakarta EE Platform 11 release.

The JESP/EFSP requires a successful ballot of the Specification Committee in order to

ratify the products of this release as a Final Specification (as that term is defined in the

EFSP).

The relevant materials are available here:

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/713__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PK8Llmyp6h1V6x9Q4OJIHteRubJvU8W1MNoZ-PK9ONbxpgRkJDAcVb19O_Db4QQWiXbalEd5586BA-Q_YJ8WYveQc7s$ 

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://deploy-preview-713--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app/specifications/webso__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PK8Llmyp6h1V6x9Q4OJIHteRubJvU8W1MNoZ-PK9ONbxpgRkJDAcVb19O_Db4QQWiXbalEd5586BA-Q_YJ8WZv7w8hY$ 

cket/2.2/

Per the process, this will be a fourteen day ballot, ending on April 12, 2024 that requires

a Super-majority positive vote of the Specification Committee members (note that there

is no veto). Community input is welcome, but only votes cast by Specification

Committee Representatives will be counted.

The Specification Committee is composed of representatives of the Jakarta EE Working

Group Member Companies (Fujitsu, IBM, Oracle, Payara, Tomitribe, Primeton, and

Shandong Cvicse Middleware Co.), along with individuals who represent the EE4J PMC,

Participant Members, and Committer Members.

Specification Committee representatives, your vote is hereby requested. Please respond

with +1 (positive), 0 (abstain), or -1 (reject). Any feedback that you can provide to

support your vote will be appreciated.

Thanks.

_______________________________________________

jakarta.ee-spec mailing list

jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this list, visit

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PK8Llmyp6h1V6x9Q4OJIHteRubJvU8W1MNoZ-PK9ONbxpgRkJDAcVb19O_Db4QQWiXbalEd5586BA-Q_YJ8WFe9YO9k$ 

_______________________________________________

jakarta.ee-spec mailing list

jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PK8Llmyp6h1V6x9Q4OJIHteRubJvU8W1MNoZ-PK9ONbxpgRkJDAcVb19O_Db4QQWiXbalEd5586BA-Q_YJ8WFe9YO9k$ 

_______________________________________________

jakarta.ee-spec mailing list

jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Kuj7NF7d7X5oyPF1sIPzdqcmEk6AHu0DYqXLJ0EMRpMtugyT0i-h0DFxm35E4FROQ96g8JbmY68MUnlRTN8noZVvV-w$ 

_______________________________________________

jakarta.ee-spec mailing list

jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!K7h9G5giJBKk3aRa3mgU1dJlgz_YsSqUHiVP9hHZkZCja0xSnw1oZqt5t20D31VcMyISNCkaLrW1Zepkizr1CCsXBlA$