[jakarta.ee-spec] Review for Approval: Jakarta EE Specification Committe

[Andrew Pielage <andrew.pielage@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The minutes for the February 5th Specification Committee call are below and are also available here. Please review and be ready for approval during our call on February 19th.

Jakarta EE Spec Committee - February 5th, 2025

Attendees (present in bold):

Kenji Kazumura - Fujitsu

Emily Jiang - IBM - Tom Watson

Ed Bratt - Oracle - Dmitry Kornilov

Andrew Pielage (chair)  - 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

Guest - Jakarta EE 11 co-release coordinators: Ed Burns, Jared Anderson

 

Eclipse Foundation: Tanja Obradovic

Past business / action items:

• Approval is requested for the minutes from the January 22nd, 2025 meeting as drafted - Approved

Agenda:

• Issue #55
• Check in on Ed Bratt’s document: link
• Check in on Ed Bratt’s PR: pending
• Question: 
• “The process for generating a CCR is to download the zip (with published SHA sum) and use the jars in the zip to run the tests. The matter of having those same jars also in maven central has nothing to do with generating a CCR. Clarify with spec committee that the individual jar files need not have a LICENSE.md file”
• It is the responsibility of the individual specification teams to ensure that the individual artefacts published to Maven Central must match those in the published zip.
• For creating a CCR, a vendor may either use the artefacts contained within the zip published to eclipse.org, or the individual artefacts downloaded via from Maven Central.
• A CCR Approver must validate that the individual artefacts available on Maven Central match those of the individual artefacts contained within the zip
• JARs do require a license file
• Should each individual JAR file have the TCK User Guide?
• No
• Roberto to potentially be invited to the next TCK call
• Catch up on the Jakarta EE 11 Release Plan [Ed Burns]
• EE 11 - Prioritized backlog · Jakarta EE11 TCK Release (github.com) and Jakarta EE11 TCK Release board  
• Platform TCK updating the TCK jobs to allow running Web Profile against GlassFish
• Web Profile still on target for Q1
• Catch up on the Jakarta EE 12 Release Plan [Jared Anderson]
• Discussions ongoing for including MVC, Config, and NoSQL
• Data 1.1 has requested a Plan Review
• Issues have been created to fully remove the Java Security Manager
• Tanja's Comments:
• CN4J meetings potentially being organised to align MicroProfile Config and Jakarta Config
• A suggestion was to instead keep the discussion constrained to the union of the two mailing lists
• CN4J mailing list does not contain the full technical community
• CNJ4 mailing list has (https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/cn4j-alliance ) 82 subscribers and both communities need to accept that not everyone is interested in being subscribed to the mailing list and it is not a mailing list necessarily focused on technical discussions
• Jakarta Config mailing list (https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/config-dev ) has 48 subscribers and is focused on technical config related topics, so this is the mailing list for the discussion
• Jakarta EE Platform mailing lst Jakarta Config mailing list 306 (https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/jakartaee-platform-dev ).
• Microprofile DEV (https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/microprofile-dev) has 114 subscribers
• There is also Microprofile WG (https://accounts.eclipse.org/mailing-list/microprofile-wg) that has 91 subscribers
• Google group mailing list numbers are not available to me (note: many community members are not willing to use google groups)
• Ongoing tracking spreadsheet of specifications progressing through the JESP specification version lifecycle
• Check on Progress Reviews for:
• Jakarta NoSQL 
• https://jakarta.ee/specifications/nosql/
• https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec/msg02795.html [Progress Review, 10.2022]
• Issue for progress review created: https://github.com/jakartaee/nosql/issues/185
• Skip progress review and go directly release review: https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/793
  But, the spec lead has trouble with uploading API jar and TCK to the staging repo. Are there any good documents for the operations or any easy ways ?
    https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/793#issuecomment-2631619218
• Should we encourage a transition to GitHub CI?
• A separate discussion - ran out of time
• Jakarta Config 
• https://jakarta.ee/specifications/config/
• https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec/msg02838.html [Plan Review, 01.2023]
• Issue for progress review created: https://github.com/jakartaee/config/issues/277 
• No update yet on Progress Review
• Discussion on mailing list for inclusion in EE12 is ongoing
• Jakarta RPC 
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• https://jakarta.ee/specifications/rpc/
• https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec/msg02129.html [Creation Review, 01.2022]
• Issue for progress/plan review created: https://github.com/jakartaee/rpc/issues/3 
• No update yet
• Check on Creation Review for Jakarta Logging
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• [From last call] Christian has been asked to create the Creation Review pull request
• Issue #83 - Clean up and clarify how to list TCK service releases on spec pages
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• Carry over from last call:
• Action: Specification mentors to create pull requests to https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications to update their pages
• Action: Ivar to update the template: https://github.com/jakartaee/specification-committee/blob/master/spec_page_template.md 
• Issue #74
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• Email: https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec.committee/msg03564.html 
• Check in on feedback and agree resolution
• Issue #58
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• Issue #81
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• New issue: #82
• Not discussed - ran out of time
• Review other open issues:
• Determine which issues to label as “enhancement” and add to our board
• Close issues which are no longer relevant or have been dealt with

--

Andrew Pielage
Senior Software Engineer

		payara.fish
		+448005385490

Try our fully managed cloud native application runtime. 15 day trial available. Payara.cloud

Payara Services Ltd, Registered office: Malvern Hills Science Park, Geraldine Road, Malvern, WR14 3SZ, United Kingdom
Registered in England and Wales: 09998946 | VAT: GB 193854467

Payara is a proud recipient of the prestigious Queen's Award for Enterprise: International Trade 2021