Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] [External] : Re: Discuss proposed Resolu

[Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The minimum compromise approach Red Hat would support would be to remove any optional TCK sets as a requirement to ratify a profile specification. Just kicking this can down the road for another release without some remediation of the current burden optional features place on the ratification process is not acceptable.

On Jul 1, 2021 at 7:12:42 PM, David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 1, 2021, at 4:37 PM, David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There is a certain "looks like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck" aspect to this.  If we are going to allow the majority of Platform implementations to ship CMP/BMP and users to use it, then how much work do we really want to put into this and basically get that same result? 

In case this came out awkwardly, the statement being made is all proposals on the table so far still allow servers to ship CMP/BMP and users to use it, so how fancy do we want get.

-David

_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee