| [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Review for approval: Jakarta EE Specification Committee Meeting Minutes May 27th, 2020 |
Attendees (present in bold):
Kenji Kazumura - Fujitsu
Dan Bandera - IBM - Kevin Sutter
Bill Shannon - Oracle - Ed Bratt, Dmitry Kornilov
Mark Wareham - Payara - Matt Gill
Scott Stark - Red Hat - Mark Little
David Blevins - Tomitribe - Jean-Louis Monterio, Cesar Hernandez
Ivar Grimstad - PMC Representative
Marcelo Ancelmo - Participant Member - Martijn Verburg
Werner Keil - Committer Member
Scott (Congquan) Wang - Primeton - Enterprise Member
Eclipse Foundation: Wayne Beaton, Tanja Obradovic, Paul Buck
Past business / action items:
The minutes from the April 29th meeting approved as drafted.
The minutes from the May 13th meeting approved as drafted.
Agenda
Review the process simplifications document being prepared by Dmitry and Kevin. Target is to review the completed draft in the May 13th Spec Committee meeting. [Dmitry, Kevin]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yp06hI4fULu5SVPIc96EK8lIZrAb8WFmg79QQfzjwY0/edit
Proposal was reviewed and discussed and a question was asked can the PR itself be simplified?
The PR content all seems “required”.
Spec Committee is asked to review and provide input on the doc.
05/27 - Decision made to focus on improving the PRs process and simplifying the PRs. Is there duplication we can avoid?
Ideas were discussed, no changes to be made at this time
No separate API docs is a candidate
What are the requirements for TCK licenses for artifacts in Maven Central? https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/tckprocess/
Can the TCK be dual licensed at Maven Central - EFTL & Apache or EPL?
Input from Wayne Beaton:
The requirement is that in order to be considered a valid Compatible Implementation, the vendor must run the EFTL version of the TCK.
So... if the way that you run the TCK to validate a Compatible Implementation is to acquire it via Maven Central, then there must be a means of acquiring the TCK under the EFTL from Maven Central.
Dual licensing (of the final ratified artifact only) would satisfy the requirement.
i) Question: Does Maven Central support dual licensing or do two copies need to be pushed to Maven Central. One with open source lic and the other with EFTL.
05/28 Update from David: Got the all clear from Sonatype. If one of the licenses is open source, we're good to go.
ii) EF to confirm that the dual lic approach is acceptable.
05/27 this is acceptable
Creation ballot for Jakarta MVC specification project [Ivar]
Item discussed. Vote underway on the public Spec Committee list. Question was asked regarding when to do the PR to create the spec page?
https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/jakarta-mvc
05/27 Ivar to summarize the steps taken for MVC and determine if the Operation document is consistent with these steps. Also follow-up with Jakarta NoSQL
06/08 Ivar proposed: https://deploy-preview-795--jakartaee.netlify.app/committees/specification/operations/#new_specifications
05/27 When to do the Milestone review and/or Plan review? Paul to work with Wayne on a proposal and post to the list or come back to this meeting
How to handle revisions to TCKs
When a TCK revision is needed/produced by an API project team, what process requirements are followed? What about older TCK releases?
I would propose
Some type of notification including a change overview
Existing TCK versions ought to remain valid and published
Perhaps some limitations
Ex. in JCP Challenged tests could only be excluded or new tests added optional/alternates
If needed, verification that ancillary change requirements (i.e. the tests are rolled up into Platform TCK) are also handled
05/27 Requirement: Spec pages need to reflect all of the states and versions of a Specification including TCK. Communication and process for making a change to a TCK:
Brief email to the spec public list to explain the change to a TCK.
Give a week for comments
A Spec Committee member signs the TCK notifies the committee of their action on the mailing list
Spec page is updated with a PR
Milestone Release Artifacts
05/27 Discussed and decided on the mailing list: PR’s will be used.
Page design for listing multiple compatible implementations for individual specifications
Increase developers traffic from the jakarta.ee page to the specification pages by providing additional helpful information on the specification project pages
05/27 David to share ideas on the Jakarta community mailing list
Steering Committee on April 7th, 2020 requested a future action for the Spec Committee to structure a discussion on how MP specs may be consumed for Jakarta EE
Noted here and to be tabled for a future meeting