Skip to main content
[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


On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 09:56, Tom Jenkinson <tom.jenkinson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 11:42, Tom Jenkinson <tom.jenkinson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 01:50, David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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?


It depends a bit on whether we need the TCK promoted (please see below) and how easy it is to do the certification request correctly (I assume we need to use a build provided by Glassfish and so we probably need to synchronize with them - please see below).

Perhaps we could use a weekly build of Glassfish but given when I released the recent updated Jakarta Transactions that weekly build of Glassfish I guess will be on the 4th October:

I don't have an ETA for the TCK to be promoted yet so that is an unknown right now:

Once we have those we can prepare the certification request - can we raise that when we just have a PR on glassfish for them to update their website or does the page need to be live?

I have provided an update in https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/156 for the next steps




> 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.

OK thanks. 


> >  - 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.

I have asked the TCK team to merge https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/pull/534 and then promote.


> > - 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

I guess we need to request a version of Glassfish that has the version of Jakarta Transactions 2.0.0 to be provided? Or can we build that ourselves? I have forgotten sorry! Do I need the TCK to be promoted too?



> 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.

Unfortunately I have restaged binaries yesterday (not for these issues, but for some copyright work - I don't intend to propose https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/issues/169 for EE9).

Do I need to let Glassfish know something though? I assumed we could restage binaries without synchronizing with them but now I assume/realise we might need them to provide a build with a restaged Jakarta Transactions so we can run TCK on it. If we need to get a build from Glassfish, do you know how we request that? (From the api changes point of view it was copyright updates: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jta-api/compare/47eb448bef2ba6bad8b1b7f58551f29e62ba83e7...5506c2260d5adfe2a5e4dc2af6009bae13929668)


Generally as of Oct 1st we're out of "nice to have" fix range and entering "it has to be a showstopper" territory.


-David



_______________________________________________
jta-dev mailing list
jta-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jta-dev

Back to the top