Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] "voting" privileges

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Lots of good discussion...
 Thank you for all of the input!  I'm just taking the last reply
from Bill as a starting point.  But, I will try to take into account
all of the other input.

First the punch
line...  As a few people have pointed out, the Platform project is
where the "tough decisions" will be made concerning the overall
Jakarta EE Platform and associated Releases.  Each of the participants
on the Platform project (leads and committers) need to represent the Platform
as a whole.  They need to take into account the views and opinions
of the various Components that feed into Platform.  So, my view is
that we stick with the original idea from last week's Platform call and
the "voting" privileges will be limited to the committers on
the Platform project.  As Bill points out, this will all be done in
an open, transparent manner so that we can be held accountable for actions
deemed inconsistent with the larger community's viewpoint.

To that end, I
looked at the make up of the Platform project.  It's kind of unique
since we have six project leads -- one from each major vendor supporting
Jakarta EE.  We also had Ivar as an independent lead, but he has since
moved to the Eclipse Foundation.  So far, we have agreed that Ivar
should continue in this role.

The more interesting
stat is the make up of the Committers on the Platform project.  Including
the leads...

• 1 Committer -- Tomitribe, Payara, Fujitsu, Eclipse Foundation, Independent (Werner)
• 2 Committers -- Red Hat, IBM
• 3 Committers -- Oracle

It's a little
heavy at the top.  My take is that we should get an additional Committer
for Tomitribe, Payara, and Fujitsu.  And, we should get at least one
more independent Committer.  And, maybe Oracle should drop off one
Committer?  That would more even the playing field, especially as
we're going through this Jakarta EE 9 roadmap and delivery exercise.  (We
would leave the EF with a single Committer/Lead with Ivar.)

One other clarification...
 Our Platform Dev calls are open for anybody to attend.  You
do not have to be a lead or committer to attend and participate on these
calls.  We had several non-committers attend our call last week.  As
an example, Carlos Andres De La Roaswas an excellent
voice on our discussion points.  We have our next call tomorrow (Nov
19)...
https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-platform-dev/msg00863.html

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:
       Bill
Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       jakartaee-platform
developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Kevin
Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       11/15/2019
20:29
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] "voting" privileges

---

I've drafted and discarded at least 4
responses to this message.

There is no one right way to make decisions for the platform.  There
are reasons to support any of the proposed approaches, but I don't find
any of them so compelling that they stand out from the rest.  I'm
not even convinced that my preferred approach is the best approach.

We purposely made some changes to how the JCP did things for years. 
Instead of having a single Spec Lead, we now have a team of people. 
I think we should start by letting that team self-organize, as has been
happening so far.  I think it's too early to declare that approach
a failure and to open up the decision making body even further.  We
can anticipate some of the potential failure modes for the current approach
(which I'll call "decisions by platform project team committers")
so let's work to mitigate those risks rather than change to a completely
different approach (e.g.,  something like what Kevin described - "decisions
by representatives of all the major components").

So, I think we should do as Kevin described and "fall back to our
original premise to trust the committer reps on the Platform project to
take into account all of the various component's views when they cast their
vote."  After all, I believe that's the job of a platform project
committer.

And let's do this in an open and transparent manner so that community members
can point out where we've failed to take into account the needs of the
entire platform.



Kevin Sutter wrote on 11/14/19 8:45 AM:
Hi,
On our Platform Dev call on Tuesday (minutes soon to be posted here:  https://eclipse-ee4j.github.io/jakartaee-platform/minutes/minutes.html),
we discussed who should be eligible to vote on the Jakarta EE 9 content
proposals.  We decided that only thecommitters
on the Platform projectwould
be eligible.

But, on second thought, I'm wondering if that's sufficient.  The Jakarta
EE 9 roadmap that we're trying to get agreement on affects all of the Jakarta
EE components, not just the platform.  I know we discussed that the
reps on the Platform should be representing their overall interests (including
components) and not just the Platform.  But, is that sufficient?

On yesterday's
Jakarta EE Updatecall,
there was discussion about how much work it is to Jakarta-ize the Specifications.
 And, we talked about the work required to do the javax->jakarta
package rename (spec, api, tck, compatible impls, etc).  Markus presented
and discussed these topics on how they relate to the JAX-RS effort.  Markus
is not directly represented on the Platform project -- that is, he doesn't
work for or with any of the committers.  He is driving much of the
work for the JAX-RS effort.  How do we ensure that voices (like Markus')
from all of the Component features are heard and counted when we make the
decisions for Jakarta EE 9?

One idea is to expand our eligible voting pool to include any committer
on any of the EE4J Specification projects.  I have no idea on how
easy it would be discern or filter the various votes, but that seems to
be a more equitable means of voting.

Or, we can fall back to our original premise to trust the committer reps
on the Platform project to take into account all of the various component's
views when they cast their vote.

Thoughts?

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx    Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev