Re: [microprofile-wg] [microprofile] Re: Requirements for compatibility

[John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

This isn’t really a compromise from Red Hat's (and Tomitribe’s) stated position. It’s the same state as before, really. Red Hat maintains its desire for simple, community-centric compatibility approach requiring successfully passing TCKs.

On Nov 3, 2021, at 4:52 PM, Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Emily,

That is exactly how Jakarta EE works today, and is the essence of the original proposal.

On 2021-11-03 7:34 p.m., Emily Jiang via microprofile-wg wrote:

At the moment, we are discussing logo vs. no logo. Is it possible to compromise the two options?

We can have a compatibility logo but for WG members only. However, non WG members are allowed to claim compatibility without the legal right of using the compatibility logo. Being a member and non-member, the only difference is the logo access.

Thoughts?

--

Mike Milinkovich

Executive Director | Eclipse Foundation AISBL

Twitter:@mmilinkov

---

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

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