I want to emphasize that it is important that we are complying with the terms of the deadline extension that was granted by the Jakarta EE platform. There are a large amount of changes going in for the Query Language subset and a good
amount of work still needed.
The pulls that are open at any given moment is a constantly changing target. If I look right now, the current set of open pulls is:
562, 551, 523 – these are part of the query language work.
553 is open in response to changes that have already gone in for the query language and could be justifiably worked if we choose to include it.
486 and 474 are not related to the query language but have not been active worked since March 8.
As long as the last 2 continue to remain inactive, the currently-open pulls look like areas that are correctly being focused on.
That said, it is true that some unrelated spec/API changes have been worked on and merged since March 8. Some of these have been some pretty good ideas and a few have been rather trivial, like the rename of getCursor(index) to cursor(index)
in the API. However, these do violate the agreement for the deadline extension and it is not worth risking that. We all need to do a better job of watching out for these and not opening them in the first place. Ed is not asking us to revert anything. Let’s
just be more careful going forward.
From:
data-dev <data-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ed Burns via data-dev <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 at 4:37 PM
To: data developer discussions <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ed Burns <Edward.Burns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [data-dev] [EXTERNAL] Re: reminder: no changes aside from directly related to JPQL subset feature
Thanks for your reply, Gavin, letting ya’ll do your job is exactly what I’m trying to do. My understanding was that there were other changes aside from those directly
related to the JPQL subset feature. If I am misunderstanding, please accept
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
Thanks for your reply, Gavin, letting ya’ll do your job is exactly what I’m trying to do. My understanding was that there were other changes aside from those directly related to the JPQL subset feature. If I am misunderstanding, please
accept my apologies.
Gavin King wrote:
> Perhaps you got confused because there was also some discussion going on in the issue
> tracker regarding changes which might in future releases of Jakarta Data. I don’t see
> how such discussions impede the delivery of Jakarta Data, and I think it’s
> inappropriate to suggest that they shouldn’t take place.
My understanding was that, beyond discussions, there were merges that were not related to the JPQL subset feature. If I am misunderstanding, I seek clarity from Nathan.
> For the record, I have dedicated many hours of my time over the last weeks to ensuring
> that this specification is delivered on time and in a form that meets the needs of the community.
> We are on or ahead of track.
As a fellow long-time EE advocate, I deeply appreciate your time and expertise. I’m beyond delighted to hear things are on or ahead of track. The JPQL subset feature is a big differentiator and value creator. I’m glad to see it going in.
Thanks for providing the opportunity to clarify.
Thanks,
Ed
| Reply anonymously to this email: https://purl.oclc.org/NET/edburns/contact
From:
Gavin King <gavin.king@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 at 16:30
To: data developer discussions <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ed Burns <Edward.Burns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [data-dev] reminder: no changes aside from directly related to JPQL subset feature
Hi, I’m not sure I understand.
The specification of JDQL is completed and merged, and we are dealing with the blast radius of that major change. I invite you, at your convenience, to review the new chapter 5 of the Data specification, which specifies the new Jakarta
Data Query Language.
The discussions currently underway are direct consequences of this change, as you may easily verify for yourself by reviewing the open pull requests. If you have any further doubts about this, I’m happy to walk you through the work we’ve
done and provide context for the mopping up that is currently going on, in person, on gchat or whatever, at your convenience.
Perhaps you got confused because there was also some discussion going on in the issue tracker regarding changes which might in future releases of Jakarta Data. I don’t see how such discussions impede the delivery of Jakarta Data, and I
think it’s inappropriate to suggest that they shouldn’t take place.
For the record, I have dedicated many hours of my time over the last weeks to ensuring that this specification is delivered on time and in a form that meets the needs of the community. We are on or ahead of track.
In short, and in the lighthearted spirit of “cut it out”, I invited you, Ed, in turn, to “butt out” and let us do our job. Thanks.
On Mar 19, 2024, at 9:11 PM, Ed Burns via data-dev <data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello data-dev community
At today's platform project call, it was brought to my attention that changes unrelated to the one allowable change (JPQL subset feature) are still being made
even though the agreed upon 2024-03-08 deadline for such changes has passed.
I am writing to this list in my capacity as release co-coordinator for EE 1 to say, politely but firmly, cut it out. The agreement was that changes would be laser
focused on just doing what was necessary to win the support of the stakeholders: introducing the JPQL subset query feature.
I acknowledge my being a non-member of this community may reduce the authority of this missive, but I observe ya'll can't afford to slow down progress toward wrapping
up your minimum viable 1.0 spec.
Thanks,
Ed Burns
Jakarta EE 11 release co-coordinator.
| Reply anonymously to this email: https://purl.oclc.org/NET/edburns/contact
_______________________________________________
data-dev mailing list
data-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org
|
