Re: [data-dev] cancel remaining October meetings?

[Nathan Rauh <nathan.rauh@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I started up the meeting today because we hadn’t followed up on last week’s action item to propose canceling it from the schedule so it was still showing there and we had at least one new person join the group since then so I didn’t want end up having them call in with no one there.  We ended it after 10 minutes with too few people to discuss anything.  This week I’m trying to be more proactive so that we can get it cleared from the calendar more than a day in advance so as to avoid confusion like had with this week’s.

 

From: data-dev <data-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 10:05 AM
To: data developer discussions <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [data-dev] cancel remaining October meetings?

No Problem, did the one today even happen? I dialed in a few minutes after 3, but nobody seemed there. Gesendet von Mail für Windows Von: Nathan Rauh Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Oktober 2022 17: 04 An: data developer discussions ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

This Message Is From an External Sender

This message came from outside your organization.

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

No Problem, did the one today even happen?

I dialed in a few minutes after 3, but nobody seemed there.

 

Gesendet von Mail für Windows

 

Von: Nathan Rauh
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Oktober 2022 17:04
An: data developer discussions
Betreff: [data-dev] cancel remaining October meetings?

 

The last few weeks we’ve had just 5 participants on the Jakarta Data call.  With so many people expected to be away at conferences during October, those of us in attendance at today’s meeting have proposed cancelling these meetings for the remainder of this month, which will make November 2nd the next meeting date.  It was also discussed during some of the initial calls that the weekly meeting cadence was really intended for the month of September to get things up and going and would become less frequent after that point.  In the meantime, we still have good discussions going on within git issues that are more focused on specific ideas, and this mailing list is also available for general topics.  If anyone would like any of the remaining October meetings to still be held, please reply to this message indicating which ones.  If I don’t hear anything within the next few days, I’ll go ahead and ask Ivar to update the calendar with the meeting cancellations.  Thanks everyone!

 

From: data-dev <data-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Otavio Santana <otaviopolianasantana@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 12:14 PM
To: data developer discussions <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [data-dev] Deciding on style/library for unit test assertion for the project

Hey, AFIK, there is no standard for Jakarta EE tests. The question is: Does this style make a readable code? This PR has also as updated a library without updates since 2012. For me: +1 On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 4: 40 PM Nathan Rauh < ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

This Message Is From an External Sender

This message came from outside your organization.

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Hey, AFIK, there is no standard for Jakarta EE tests.

 

The question is: Does this style make a readable code?

 

This PR has also as updated a library without updates since 2012.

 

For me: +1

 

On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 4:40 PM Nathan Rauh <nathan.rauh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There was a pull #33  opened recently to use a different style/library for unit test assertions.  Absent any specific direction/standardization from Jakarta on the matter, this is something that should be decided by the developers on this project who will end up writing and maintaining the tests.  Could everyone who has an opinion on the matter either add a thumbs up or thumbs down to the main comment in the pull?  Or if you prefer an entirely different approach for testing then add a comment to the issue.  Thanks everyone!

 

Also, on last week’s Jakarta Data meeting, there was some discussion about proposing to reduce the number of meetings for October to 2, but the question was never sent out to the mailing list and therefore the Jakarta EE calendar still shows that there is a meeting this Wednesday.  At this point, it’s too close for making changes, so I’ll plan to start the call this Wednesday at its normally scheduled time.

 

 

From: Werner Keil <notifications@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 3:05 AM
To: jakartaee/data <data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Nathan Rauh <nathan.rauh@xxxxxxxxxx>, Review requested <review_requested@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakartaee/data] Replacing assertion libraries: Hamcrest by AssertJ (PR #33)

@keilw requested your review on: #33 Replacing assertion libraries: Hamcrest by AssertJ. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because your review was requested. Message ID: <jakartaee/data/pull/33/issue_event/7513815006

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

This Message Is From an External Sender

This message came from outside your organization.

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

@keilw requested your review on: #33 Replacing assertion libraries: Hamcrest by AssertJ.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID: <jakartaee/data/pull/33/issue_event/7513815006@xxxxxxxxxx>

_______________________________________________
data-dev mailing list
data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org

 

--

Otávio Santana

 

 

twitter: http://twitter.com/otaviojava

site:     http://about.me/otaviojava