[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [jta-dev] Jakarta Transactions 2.0 for Jakarta EE 9 remaining items
|
Great progress. Do you think we could be complete end of day Thursday so that the spec committee could start the final ballot Friday morning?
> On Sep 24, 2020, at 4:33 AM, Tom Jenkinson <tom.jenkinson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We now have a staged 2.0.0: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/171
Excellent.
> I didn't stage a spec release (but did build a draft). I don't think the specs go to jakarta.oss.sonatype.org but if they do need to be uploaded there I can look into that.
Right, they don't go in jakarta.oss.sonatype.org.
The next step here is to generate final versions of the specification HTML and PDF and overwrite the RC3 copies in this PR:
- https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/265
Also yank any 'RC3' or similar designations from the _index.md and similar.
I saw another question on release date to use. Hugo won't publish _index.md files if the date is in the future and this spec will be complete and public (hopefully) a few weeks before the Jakarta EE 9 Platform spec, so definitely don't use November. Any date that's current or recently past works.
> > - promote the TCK
>
> I think I can take that generally - it relates to https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/156.
>
> If another Jakarta Transactions project committer can help review https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/431 it will help though.
I did a grep through the TCK and I think it's good enough to pass a vote. My recommendation would be to promote it and target any improvements for either a maintenance release or when we target java 11 and very likely have to release them all again.
> > - Submit certification request
>
> > - Update draft PR in jakartaee/specifications repo with above data
>
> Please can you clarify "Submit certification request" compared to the PR (https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/265).
We need the compatible implementation to submit a Certification Request to this project claiming compliance with the promoted TCK. It'd be identical to this one for Jakarta Transactions 1.3
- https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/50
> Does anyone think we need https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/169 (or anything else from https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues that doesn't have the EE9 label) for EE9?
If it was fixed with the staged binaries, great. If not, best to leave it alone for now as re-rolling the binaries will mean GlassFish has to redo any work incorporating the staged binaries.
Generally as of Oct 1st we're out of "nice to have" fix range and entering "it has to be a showstopper" territory.
-David
