> I am not going to hold you off the current release
Are you (Emily) the gatekeeper we need to pass ? Or are you talking on behalf of the Steering Committee ?
Are `you` in your sentence above me (Phillip) ? As I am speaking on behalf of the MicroProfile GraphQL Workgroup.
This is not a debate between minor and service release. This is an issue of trust. Now, I get that you do not trust me, and I am fine with that, but, like I said, I am speaking on behalf of the MicroProfile GraphQL Workgroup, of which IBM has
a representation (Andy) that agrees that this is (technically) a service release. So you need to check in with your representation. If you do not trust your own representation, then join the MicroProfile GraphQL Workgroup yourself and take part.
We (MicroProfile GraphQL Workgroup) have already concluded that this is a service release. You either trust, or have a representation that you trust, or you take part yourself.
Now, I am sure you can agree that taking part yourself in all workgroups is just not a scalable solution for the Steering Committee, and that is why you should, as a vendor, have some representation on the Spec Workgroup that you trust.
If a Spec Workgroup have to transfer the context of months worth of discussion and work to the Steering Committee on every release every time, we (MicroProfile) will halt to a standstill. That is not a scalable solution. The Steering Committee should not be the police. The Steering Committee should help to enable the induvidual workgroup to perform optimally and trust them.
> Maybe when you perform a follow up release, you can add the release note then?
Me (Phillip) will not be doing any more releases. But you can make sure your representation knows about your requirement.
Cheers