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 January 9th, 2018

Hi All,

can you please review the below meeting minutes for approval on our next call?

Spec Committee Meeting Minutes January 9th, 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


  • Introducing Paul Buck, VP Community Development at Eclipse Foundation

  • Past business / action items

    • Approval of Meeting min Dec 19th

    • Ivar moved, Bill second, no objections - minutes are approved

  • Jakarta EE Town Hall call for the community

    • We’ll use Jakarta EE Working Group timeslot, Jan 30th

      • Review of 2018

      • Look ahead

    • Tanja will send an email for panel participation

      • Kevin Sutter confirm he is available already

    • Tanja to send an email to the community and adjust the meeting invite

  • Jakarta EE Working Group calls

  • TCK process - David Blevins

    • Refer to email “Understanding the Current Specification Process” and Understanding Java EE TCK Process

    • Understanding MicroProfile TCK Process - Kevin Sutter, please review for discussion in the New Year

    • We will invite Red Hat to present overview of the CDI/Bean Validation TCK process on the next call if possible.

    • Completion of the TCK process no later than Jan 30th 2019

    • The topic of distribution of TCK via Maven Central was discussed

      • Compiled ZIP files can also be distributed via EF downloads server.

      • Some of these TCKs are quite large and are produced several times a year, so Sonatype may not be happy with us.

      • May consider using EF hosted Nexus instance

      • Do we need consumers to explicitly agree to any terms to get access to the TCK for a Ratified Final Specification? (e.g. some sort of click through)

        • “We gotta have an audit trail” - Dan Bandera

We did not address topics below

  • Identifying the work on the projects that can be done at this point:

    • The Scope (and descriptions) for the Specifications are not well-defined.

    • Project names- Jakarta EE Server Pages?, Jakarta EE Batch?

    • EF will open an issue for each of the projects requesting the work needed

  • Jakarta EE Spec process and Jakarta EE NoSQL project

    • based on EFSP v1.0, but not necessarily the same

    • We will use  Jakarta EE NoSQL to test  EF Spec Process and do customization if necessary to create Jakarta EE Spec Process.By going through the process with Jakarta EE NoSQL, we will capture notes and evolve a draft of the Jakarta EE Specification Process.

    • Jakarta EE NoSQL provisioning is next step; we are waiting on :

      • Board approval of the new IP policy (DONE)

      • Agreements need to be in place (MCCA and WGPA) for project lead/primary committer (Tomitribe)

      • Agreements for other committers (being pursued by the EF Membership Team via separate channels).

      • Werner - update on Jakarta EE NoSQL

        • Nothing to add. We’re waiting on agreements to be signed. Hopefully we’ll have what we need in 2019Q1. There is effectively zero chance that we will be able to bootstrap NoSQL in 2018.

    • The equivalent of a JCP maintenance review needs to be addressed (additional notes Nov 28th)

      • Please refer to Maintenance Reviews email thread.

    • We need a “Dials and knobs” document (possibly an FAQ) that details how a Working Group might extend the EFSP.

      • Suggestion to describe what is immutable.

  • Jakarta EE road map - on hold till all agreements are in place, however we should start planning

  • Java EE Specification Documents contribution from Oracle -> this is still being discussed, however for now the answer is NO

    • No news are expected in next little while  

    • Bill Shannon reported that the best case scenario is ⅓ specs will be contributed and ⅔ will not be (EJB and Servlet will not be contributed); criteria for deciding what specification can be contributed is not clear yet

Thanks!
Tanja

--

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