User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:104.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/104.0
Hi Wayne,
thanks for your support on this and now
I can see in my EF profile the Project Membership to MicroProfile
too (without filling any additional forms by myself)!
I had sent a request before, but it looks like it got stuck and
while getting iJUG joining 3 WGs (MicroProfile, Jakarta EE and
Adotium) at the same time and I tried to follow the advice to
contribute first until getting write access - in general a good
idea ;-)
But while being involved deeper, it's
sometimes blocking things or now in one case my vote is not
counted - so a clarification this is necessary.
What I need to do for getting this
fixed for Jakarta EE and Adoptium too?
May be it is a break in the membership
joining process, because for the first part it is an agreement
between two organisations (EF and iJUG in this case) and then
afterwards the definition of official delegates of the joining
organisation individuals, while (as far as i know only the main
delegate, not the Alternate) could receive committer rights in the
WG environment.
I think a form in the Eclipse Profile section of the Website could
help to trigger this process or more detailed information on the
"Participant Representative (committer)" way would be helpful -
may be to get new WG Members too!
Best regards,
Jan
PS: I will forward the original email
to you for review.
Am 05.08.22 um 03:32 schrieb EMO EMO:
As the member representative for a MicroProfile working
group participant, Jan can designate a Participant
Representative (committer) on the MicroProfile
Specification Project as described in the Eclipse Foundation
Specification Process.
I'll initiate the committer paperwork process. You should
receive an email with instructions, Jan.
Jan, with what member of the EF staff have "tried to fix
that" with? AFAICT, no request has been received by the EMO,
so I'd like to circle back and make sure that our staff
understands where to direct folks with these sorts of
requests.
one small correction: My vote is a binding vote
because I am a Committer by role (iJUG
representative).
However, this is not reflected correctly in a lot of
MPWG places and need to be fixed at some point - but
my tries to fix that with EF staff and/or MP
self-management where not successful until now...
;-)
Best,
Jan
Am 03.08.22 um 23:34 schrieb Emily Jiang via
microprofile-wg:
Thank you all for casting your votes on
this subject! The voting period has ended.
Below are the results.
I declare the winning option is Option
B: Use
OTel property.
MicroProfile Telemetry team can proceed with
Option B and make corresponding updates to
reflect the vote.
On
Wednesday, July 27, 2022 at 8:46:37 AM
UTC-4 Emily Jiang wrote:
Context: MicroProfile Telemetry wants
to disable OpenTelemetry unless end
users want to enable OpenTelemetry
explicitly. In doing so, it needs to use
a configuration to enable/disable
OpenTelemetry.
Do
we want to define our own property
mp.telemetry.enabledor
use the
property name from OTel (otel.experimental.sdk.enabled,
the property name will be renamed
to otel.sdk.enabled eventually)?
There
are a couple of options:
Option
A: Define our own property
mp.telemetry.enabled
Option
B: Use OTel property
We
could not reach agreement on
which option to choose despite
of a few meeting discussions in
MicroProfile Telemetry calls and
MicroProfile Technical calls.
Therefore, a vote is needed to
settle this.
There
are cons/pros for the above
option. Please refer to this
doc for the full lists of
cons/pros before you cast your
vote.
The
vote will run for 7 days and
will conclude on 3rd August.
Only the votes from MicroProfile
Committers will be counted
towards the result as the
binding votes. However,
MicroProfile non-committers are
welcome to vote as well and
votes will be non-binding votes.
Please
just vote on this thread. No
discussion please. All
discussions are to happen on the
thread [DISUSSION] Configure
MicroProfile Telemetry