Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Review for Approval: Spec Committee Meeting Minutes Nov 14th, 2018

Hi All,

please review for approval next week.

Thanks!

Tanja

Spec Committee Meeting Minutes Nov 14th, 2018

Attendees (present in bold):

Kenji Kazumura - Fujitsu, Michael DeNicola

Dan Bandera - IBM, Kevin Sutter, Alasdair Nottingham

Bill Shannon - Oracle, Ed Bratt, Dmitry Kornilov

Steve Millidge - Payara, Arjan Tijms

Scott Stark - Red Hat, Mark Little

David Blevins - Tomitribe, Richard Monson-Haefel

Ivar Grimstad - PMC Representative

Alex Theedom - Participant Member

Werner Keil - Committer Member


  • Past business / action items

    • none

  • Reviewing the Plan

    • Oct. 6: Draft complete

    • Oct. 10: Specification Committee approval to refer it to the Steering Committee

    • Oct. 16: Steering Committee approval to release for community review

    • Oct. 17 - 31: Community review

    • Work on the final version

  • Jakarta EE Working Group calls - next call Nov 28th

  • EFSP v1.0

    • 2 week period for comments (Nov 7th - 21st) , our next call Nov 28th is voting for EFSP v1.0

  • Jakarta EE Spec process

    • Jakarta EE Spec process, is based on EFSP, but not necessarily the same

    • Concern was expressed that the voting process is not well defined by the EFSP.

      • The EFSP is purposefully silent on the specifics of how long the voting period lasts, or any indication of channels. Specific constraints regarding how votes are run can be described in Working Group-specific implementations of the specification process.

      • Specific concern was voiced that a super-majority approval could theoretically be obtained via private channels, potentially excluding as much as one third of the Specification Committee members. Wayne stated that the underlying principles of open source outlined in the EDP inform all of our processes; specifically that openness, transparency, and vendor neutrality are assumed in all processes.

      • Wayne agreed that we should consider qualifying how we run votes in EFSP 1.1. Terms like “transparent”, “defined period”, and “eligible voters must be informed” were suggested.

    • It was requested that we include an appendix or addendum to the EFSP that provides an example of how the process may be specialized by a Working Group.

    • We will use  Jakarta EE NoSQL to test  EF Spec Process and do customization if necessary to created Jakarta EE Spec process.

      • As we work through the process with Jakarta EE NoSQL, we will capture notes and evolve a draft of the Jakarta EE Specification Process.

    • RESOLVED: Jakarta EE NoSQL will be allowed to begin work using the draft EF Spec Process, assuming the team is aware and prepared for the risks associated with working through draft process

      • Mike Denicola moved

      • Dan Bandera second

      • No objections

    • Vote on Creation review on Jakarta EE NoSql - voting from the Spec Cmte

  • TCK process - David Blevins

    • Still in draft; the document on the team drive

    • Push out 2 weeks or delegate to someone else

      • David does not have time to look into this in next 2 weeks; we’ll discuss on 28th again


--

Tanja Obradovic

Jakarta EE Program Manager | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Twitter: @TanjaEclipse

Eclipse Foundation: The Platform for Open Innovation and Collaboration



Avast logo

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


Back to the top