[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Fair rules for "optional" TCK compliance tests
|
Yes, the JESP is approved by the
Jakarta EE WG. But the JESP specializes the EFSP, it cannot
contradict the EFSP on something as fundamental as the definition
of Compatible Implementation.
On 2020-07-06 12:35 p.m., Scott Stark
wrote:
But the EFSP is extended by the JESP. Cannot the
JESP be updated without board involvement?
On 2020-07-02 7:05 p.m., Ed Bratt wrote:
I'd use 'requirements' instead of 'non-optional
elements' but that's just me.
Since this is a language alteration to the EFSP, we'll
eventually need to move this to the Spec. committee and
then, I think we'll need some discussion at an even
broader level.
The EFSP is now controlled by the Eclipse Foundation
Board of Directors. A super-majority vote of the Board is
required to change it. This puts it on par with the
Eclipse Development Process.
There are also now multiple groups using the EFSP
(Sparkplug, and soon AsciiDoc). They are certainly smaller
and less complex than Jakarta EE, but their interests need
to be respected when making any modifications.
Just wanted to make it clear that modifying the EFSP is
now a more complex task than it was back in 2018 when it
was being primarily formulated for the Jakarta EE Working
Group.