| Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [jakartaee-tck-dev] Finalizing the TCKs |
Amelia,
Adding platform-dev ml...
The Platform call wasn't scheduled for today, so perhaps next week there
can be discussion about the below. I did think more about this and
would like to propose a few adjustments to give the community enough
time to give feedback but also meet our schedule constraints.
With regard to Standalone TCK deliverables, we can easily stage new
builds of each Standalone TCKs, however we can only promote a specific
versioned Standalone TCK once (with the last promoted TCK version
targeted for EE 9 final release).
So from a TCK perspective, I propose that contributors review TCK
documentation and create pull requests over the next N days, where N is
to be discussed further (perhaps N could be 10 calendar days including
some non-working days or some other duration yet to be discussed).
Whatever N is for the final date to create TCK documentation pull
requests by, each SPEC API ballot could work off of an initial promoted
TCK (e.g. assuming no TCK test failures and initial TCK doc changes are
merged).
If subsequent TCK documentation pull requests come in after the SPEC API
ballot, the SPEC lead (or TCK team) could push a new staged Standalone
TCK update that could then be promoted with the updated TCK documentation.
The only negative is that each Standalone TCK that is promoted after the
respective SPEC API ballot is approved, would need to be copied to
http://download.eclipse.org/jakartaee (along with SHA sum).
I suggest that we start following ^ this week if no there are no reasons
presented as to why we cannot abide by the current schedule for SPEC API
ballots and also still merge in further TCK documentation changes from
the community (while we have time left for doing that after SPEC API
ballots complete but before EE 9 is final).
More responses inline below.
On 8/3/20 6:24 PM, Amelia Eiras wrote:
> Scott,
>
> I think your explanation is quite beneficial for tomorrow's platform
> call, beyond that call and its minutes.
> Releases have a deadline, that means that expectations need to be fluid
> yet clearly stated to simplify the process of the release. I see you as
> a Mentor for this thread. :)
Thank you, I think that we all desire to bring more community to the
Jakarta EE Platform TCK. IMO, we did very well with getting community
contributions for the big bang "EE 8 ==> EE 9" changes but not as much
for other TCK changes, which could be a number of reasons (including
documentation/wiki need to provide more 'how thinks work' guidance to
developers.)
>
> After I read your reply on the why of time, I finally understood the
> workaround time-limits, the steps 1, 2... when dealing with the TCK.
> I would go further and ask for us to start the wiki under the TCK
> documenting this.
+1 I have been thinking that we should update the initial wiki page to
be a proper landing page that links to sub-topics, so we can have EE 9
development process topics as well as user oriented topics (really,
should have no friction against adding any type of sub-topics with no
limit on amount of nesting).
> With Jakarta EE, the TCK is public yet its process is
> a complete vacuum with bare to none documentation on what to expect when
> contributing to it.
Yes, it is a lot different developing the TCK than just using it, many
of the contributors may not be users of the TCKs yet, for those
contributors it is even harder to understand the TCK internals.
>
> Up until now, we have never discussed the bare minimum expectations when
> TCK contributed. We ought to fix that.
+1
> Related to Jakarta EE contributing-- last week, I was candidly asked via
> a Java public forum on a private slack group how much time was ok to
> "wait" for a PR review/merge or git issue accomplishment under the
> Jakarta EE project *before asking for help*. I said 72hrs or so,
> patience and respect to Contributors of the project means we understand
> that their time, YOUR, MINE, OURS, is the most precious commodity & a
> contract if choosing to be a #ossDOER that wants to have impactful
> contributions.
>
> Lastly, I believe candid conversations lead such as the one you are
> beautifully facilitating lead to documentation. Brainstorming and
> exchanges such as these ought to make you and I scalable.
+100 and thanks for taking the time to contribute here!
I see good
> ideas, values from those that care to share *a
> direct acknowledgement to scale stuff that is worth broadening. * THAT I
> CARE THE MOST.
+100
>
> Hugs,
Ditto and have a great day! :-)
Scott
>
> Amelia Eiras
> twitter.com/ameliaeiras <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> Tribe:http://tomitribe.com <http://tomitribe.com/>
> https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
> OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 12:03 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 12:59 PM Amelia Eiras <aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> Hola Scott,
>
>
> Hola Amelia,
>
> Thanks for responding!
>
>
> I have bias feedback on how the window to receive feedback ought
> to be set up.
> Bare with me and thanks for brainstorming after you consume this
> message.
>
> If an issue/PR is sent on Friday, do we expect the contributors
> to work on it over the weekend?
>
>
> I agree that we do not want them to work on it over the weekend.
>
> If yes, why is that?
>
> Should we assume that contributions ought to happen during the
> work week instead?
>
>
> +1
>
> WHY?
> the 72 hours period for example ought not to contain the wknd.
>
>
> Whether it is 78 hours or some other amount of time, we still may
> have additional standalone TCK documentation pull requests that come
> in after we have "promotion" (e.g. copied to
> https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/promoted/jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip)
> of the respective versioned TCK. For example, if
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382 is promoted
> on Wednesday instead of Tuesday, a contributor could notice on
> Thursday that an important TCK documentation should be made, that we
> could increment the version to jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.1.zip and
> stage/promote that.
>
> Fyi, the "stage" term refers to copying the latest nightly TCK build
> to
> https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
> and "promotion" refers to creating a versioned TCK.
>
> I'm not aware of any problems with promoting multiple versions of a
> TCK, however there could be time constraints that dictate whether to
> promote a specific TCK again.
>
>
> We as a community can contribute any day we choose to, HOWEVER
> we ought to be aware AND PROTECTIVE that weekends for many of us
> are free of professional work-devices.
>
>
> Another approach could be to start the time clock now by emailing
> all of the various SPEC API contributors that their feedback on the
> TCK documentation contained in the respective TCK zip in
> https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
> is welcome in the form of pull requests on
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck. The advantage of
> this approach is that contributors would have more time to contribute.
>
> Another advantage of emailing all SPEC API contributors now is that
> we don't yet have issues for all of the SPEC API TCKs created yet,
> so sending a generic email to all could help get the message out
> sooner so the TCK documentation pull requests can come in sooner.
>
>
> As such, I would recommend that the August 4th gets moved to
> later to honor that weekend ought not to be included (yet are
> awesome plus to have) on the window to contribute.
>
>
> Also of importance is to keep the SPEC API ballots moving along and
> not getting blocked on the promotion of TCKs, as well as not getting
> blocked on the TCK team creating the tracking issues for promoting TCKs.
>
> So, if we delay the August 4th TCK promotions until August 6th and
> send generic email today to all of the SPEC API mailing lists to
> review their respective staged TCK zips (and create pull requests on
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck for further changes
> that are needed), that might be more helpful.
>
> The following schedule (from Ed's original email from this thread)
> is what we are trying to achieve with regard to promoting the TCKs:
>
> "
>
> * Wave 0 (Any time)
>
> * Concurrency
> * Messaging
> * Persistence
> * (From the Platform TCK)
> o Web Services Metadata
>
> * Wave 1 (Any time)
>
> * Annotations
> * _expression_ Language
> * JSON Processing
> * Servlet
> * SOAP with Attachments
> * WebSocket
>
> * Wave 2 (Planned to start July 28)
>
> * Authentication
> * Authorization
> * JSON Binding
> * Server Pages
>
> * Wave 3 (Planned to start Aug 5)
>
> * XML Web Services
>
> * Wave 4 (Planned to start Aug 11)
>
> * RESTful Web Services
> * Transaction
>
> * Wave 5 (Planned to start Aug 18)
>
> * Connectors
> * Standard Tag Library
> * (From the Platform TCK)
> o Enterprise Beans
> o Enterprise Web Services
>
> * Wave 6 (Planned to start Aug 25
>
> * Security
> * Server Faces
>
> * Wave 7 (Planned to start Aug 31)
>
> * Jakarta EE Web Profile
> * Jakarta EE Platform
>
> "
>
>
>
> Stay awesome formidable #ossDOER and happy August to everyone here,
>
>
> Thanks, you too! :-)
>
> Scott
>
>
> Amelia Eiras
> twitter.com/ameliaeiras <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> Tribe:http://tomitribe.com <http://tomitribe.com/>
> https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
> OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:35 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 9:57 PM Scott Marlow
> <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> The committer teams need to review the staged TCK
> content and give their
> +1 for the relevant TCK bundle to be promoted. The
> promotion will
> freeze the TCK for release, which essentially means it
> is frozen. If a
> blocking change in a TCK is needed, we will re-release
> with a
> incremented version number as mentioned below.
>
> The possible states that TCKs can transition through are:
>
> * Staged via
> https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
>
> (each TCK zip may be updated multiple times).
>
> * Promoted via
> https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/promoted
>
> (each versioned TCK zip is frozen immediately, further
> changes can only
> appear via a version number increment).
>
> * Final release for Jakarta EE 9 via
> https://download.eclipse.org/jakartaee/...
>
>
> On 7/27/20 11:21 AM, Ed Bratt wrote:
> > Due to how the Specification Committee has defined
> the process, any
> > change to the TCK requires are re-release -- Docs.
> change, Exclude List
> > change, anything else that would change content
> and/or generate a build
> > forces a version number increment.
> >
> > I think the procedures described below will allow us
> to stop builds,
> > once a Specification has gone to ballot. So, that's
> my first concern. We
> > just need to follow the ballot progress closely and
> not inadvertently
> > create an update that wasn't asked for.
>
> From a process point of view, I think that the SPEC API
> representative/lead/committers can help determine when
> it is time for
> the relevant TCK to transition from Staged to Promoted
> state.
>
> Question, if we don't hear feedback from a SPEC lead or
> committers, who
> can make the decision to proceed with Promoting the
> TCK? Also how long
> should we wait for feedback?
>
>
> There is no perfect amount of time to wait for feedback, if
> we make it too short, we may need to stage/promote a newer
> standalone TCK version for further changes. If we make it
> too long, we may never hear feedback and could
> jeopardize the EE 9 schedule.
>
> I'm thinking that we can wait a few days after pinging the
> SPEC API teams (whether it is sending email or pinging
> lead(s)).
>
> For example, for
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382 we
> sent email to ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> on Friday July 31 and will
> promote jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip first thing on
> Tuesday August 4, 2020 if we do not hear feedback.
>
> Worse case, we could later stage
> a jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.1.zip if further TCK pull
> requests for documentation changes are important.
>
> Scott
>
>
> Good news, it is now time for Staged
> jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip
> to be reviewed via
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382.
> Feedback is
> welcome (link to staged TCK zip is in the issue)!
>
> Also good news, it is now time for Staged
> jakarta-_expression_-language-tck-4.0.0.zip to be reviewed
> via
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/387.
>
> Once the relevant SPEC API lead and/or committers has
> given their
> approval via the relevant jakartaee-tck issue, we will
> Promote the
> related TCK.
>
> We have created some other similar "Review and promote "
> tracking issues
> for other TCKs but help is needed to created tracking
> issues for other
> TCKs still (open
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+Review+and+promote
>
> for current issues).
>
> Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
>