| Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] [External] : [DISCUSS] Release Review for Jakarta Interceptors 2.2 |
_______________________________________________Does Interceptors not require its own CCR?Last time it had its own CCR for Weld which pointed at the CDI TCK.
-- Andrew Pielage
Senior Software Engineer
From: jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Scott Stark via jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 04 April 2024 01:49
To: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] [External] : [DISCUSS] Release Review for Jakarta Interceptors 2.2The links to the CDI CCR and TCK were added to the PR.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 3:23 PM Emily Jiang via jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Scott,Please see Ed's comments below regarding providing a link to the CCR record. I understand there is no TCK jar for the interceptor spec repo. I am not sure whether it makes sense to point to the CDI TCK jar or add a comment to say there is no TCK jar. If we provide the CDI tck jar, this might create issues as we won't be able to promote CDI tck as part of this Interceptor release. Please share your thoughts on this.
ThanksEmily
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 4:44 PM Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The PR has been updated and the spec page clarifies that Java SE 11 is
the binary target of the artifacts.
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:37 AM Emily Jiang <emijiang6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Thank you Ed for reporting this! I will extend this ballot till the end of this week for the issues to be resolved. I will conclude this ballot earlier if the issue is resolved sooner.
> Scott, can you look into this and report back once it is done?
> Thanks
> Emily
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 4:30 PM Ed Bratt via jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Still not noticing a CCR against the Interceptors project issue list. Am I looking in the right place? Ostensibly, the ballot concludes today. Is the team working on this?
>>
>> -- Ed
>>
>> On 3/29/2024 12:30 PM, Ed Bratt via jakarta.ee-spec wrote:
>>
>> -1, Oracle -- First two points on the list below are what lead to this vote
>>
>> I do not see a CCR in the Interceptors project JIRA. For proper record keeping, I would strongly advise a tracking issue be created for this, even if the test results are included in a CDI CCR. (The CDI CCR for Weld, does not mention Interceptors)
>> Since I cannot locate a link to the actual TCK, I cannot validate any of the contents in that document
>> Please update the PR for the Spec. page to include a link to the CCR.
>> Similar to my comments on the CDI ballot, I do not see any SHA SUMs so we have no ability to track which TCK was actually used to certify WELD. These should be included in the CCR issue as well as in the archival document at the product site, showing the certification results.
>> I believe the Spec. page must be revised to state minimum Java SE version is 17 (similar to my comment on CDI)
>>
>> I will be happy to revise this if the TCK coordinates and a CCR issue could be provided in the documentation. I apologize for not reviewing the content earlier.
>>
>> -- Ed
>>
>> On 3/19/2024 7:59 AM, Emily Jiang via jakarta.ee-spec wrote:
>>
>> Greetings Jakarta EE Specification Committee,
>>
>> I request your vote to approve and ratify the release of Jakarta Interceptors 2.2 as part of the Jakarta EE Platform 11 release.
>>
>> The JESP/EFSP requires a successful ballot of the Specification Committee in order to ratify the products of this release as a Final Specification (as that term is defined in the EFSP).
>>
>> The relevant materials are available here:
>>
>> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/702
>> - https://deploy-preview-702--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app/specifications/interceptors/2.2/
>>
>>
>> Per the process, this will be a fourteen-day ballot, ending on Tuesday, April 2nd, 2024, that requires a Super-majority positive vote of the Specification Committee members (note that there is no veto). Community input is welcome, but only votes cast by Specification Committee Representatives will be counted.
>>
>> The Specification Committee is composed of representatives of the Jakarta EE Working Group Member Companies (Fujitsu, IBM, Oracle, Payara, Tomitribe, Primeton Information Technologies, and Shandong Cvicse Middleware Co.), along with individuals who represent the EE4J PMC, Participant Members, and Committer Members.
>>
>> Specification Committee representatives, your vote is hereby requested. Please respond with +1 (positive), 0 (abstain), or -1 (reject). Any feedback that you can provide to support your vote will be appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Emily Jiang
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
>> jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Pib3MgPZ0NdRRx0OufyAlm9vconbgaWueN7T1xYcJLQ7tHnyYKHEkfrOS-BWEp_XI_hQvbLiXp4VysYgrYz1RWhIB98$
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
>> jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!JRPr60d-eU7-eqUgwn6_Kb3cGh0L6LHvYSuoVcr0F8x8YYIm8oi7rbbthaNjJ2-p6Jqrefa2DrkmetFACIikLeU6zQY$
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
>> jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
>
--
_______________________________________________Thanks
Emily
jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec
jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec