Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] list of compatible implementations

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with the
idea of using PRs.  As long as the format of the page data is sufficiently
documented, then that would be the preferred route.

But, I don't think
the Spec Committee needs to be involved with each component Specification
approval and merging, do we?  Can't we leave that up to the individual
component Spec teams?  

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:
       David
Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       Jakarta
specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       10/11/2019
06:04 PM
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] list of compatible implementations
Sent
by:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

On Oct 11, 2019, at 3:53 PM, Bill Shannon
<bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Or perhaps
the implementation owner is expected to submit a Pull Request against
the specification page?

This has been my preference.  The
spirit being "don't make work for others."

When they submit that PR there should
be an approved certification request from the Specification Project in
the PR description.  Until we see that we don't click merge.

If all lines up, anyone from the Specification
Committee can click merge.


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