[jakarta.ee-spec] Jakarta EE Spec Committee Approved Meeting Minutes - A

[Andrew Pielage <andrew.pielage@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jakarta EE Spec Committee - April 2nd, 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 March 19th, 2025 meeting as drafted - Approved

Agenda:

• Catch up on the Jakarta EE 11 Release Plan [Jared Anderson]
• EE 11 - Prioritized backlog · Jakarta EE11 TCK Release (github.com) and Jakarta EE11 TCK Release board  
• Web Profile release review PR created: https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/802 
• Ballot ongoing - supermajority reached, though not everyone has yet voted
• Platform TCK progressing
• Initial delivery estimate: 1 month
• Will happen this quarter
• Web Profile and Core Profile POM
• Not normative, provided for convenience
• No action required at this time
• Do we want to adjust the language slightly? Currently the Platform and Web Profile pages say that they have “removed all usages of the Security Manager”
• Change to “Remove Security Manager requirements”?
• Catch up on the Jakarta EE 12 Release Plan [Jared Anderson]
• Project board: https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/17/views/1 
• Aim to get Plan Reviews in by the 15th April
• Do we need to increase the Creation Review requirements?
• Require a Progress Review within x months (instead of the standard 12)?
• Do they need to list milestones?
• Would require adjusting the JESP text
• Need to be careful that we don’t make the requirements to stringent
• We shall make an issue to investigate and discuss in the specification committee repo
• Ongoing tracking spreadsheet of specifications progressing through the JESP specification version lifecycle
• Issue #55 - TCK Archive Format
• Check in on Ed Bratt’s document: link
• Check in on Ed Bratt’s PR: pending
• Issue #83 - Clean up and clarify how to list TCK service releases on spec pages
• Carry over from Feb 19th call:
• Action: Ivar to update the template: https://github.com/jakartaee/specification-committee/blob/master/spec_page_template.md 
• Check on progress of pull requests
• Issue #74 - TCK challenge automatic acceptance
• Email: https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec.committee/msg03564.html 
• Carry over from Feb 19th call:
• An issue will be created to track this
• Should we instead track it in the existing issue in a similar manner to #83?
• Yes - Andrew will add a comment to issue #74
• Issue #58 - TCK challenge templates
• Check on progress of pull requests
• No noticeable progress, mentors reminded to create the pull requests and then update the appropriate checkboxes in the issue
• Issue #82 - Consistent approach for TCK challenge exclusions
• Carry over from February 19th: TCK Process should be updated with something akin to Scott Starks suggestion.
• No progress
• MicroProfile Rehoming Proposal
• MicroProfile Working Group raised concerns about the openness of Jakarta EE
• What is meant by “openness”?
• The specification committee mailing list is private
• It is publicly indexed however: https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec.committee/2025/Mar/index.html 
• The approved meeting minutes for the specification committee are published to the website and to the public specification mailing list
• Is this about participation?
• Do we actually need the private mailing list?
• Could run most things in the public by default
• Do we want to open up the regular specification committee meeting which is currently private?
• Possibly once a quarter?
• Encourage feedback via GitHub issues?
• Allow “listen only” participation?
• The MicroProfile mailing list conversation: https://groups.google.com/g/microprofile/c/6HI5JjrZi3c 
• 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