Re: [ee4j-pmc] Specification project scope statements

[Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We not looking for "simple". Rather, we are looking for a concise, easy to understand, and a clear definition of the intent of the work done by the project and technology covered by the specification. 

 

All that says is: "Eclipse Proeject for JMS provides the API and TCK for Java™ Message Service (JMS) API, starting from the specification defined by JSR-343."

This is actually a bad example that needs to be changed. It makes no attempt to actually define the scope of JMS. It's basically self-referential.

"...starting from the specification defined..." doesn't actual provide any boundaries. Starting from there, I could basically implement anything and everything.

Finally, it's basically a point-in-time statement. The scope needs to be timeless and aspirational.

We'll need something along the lines of: "Jakarta Message Service describes a means for Jakarta EE applications to create, send, and receive messages via loosely coupled, reliable asynchronous communication services."  Or something like that (I just cobbled that together quickly; consider it an example of form, and not anything like a completely correct statement of scope for that technology).

Wayne

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 5:23 PM Scott Kurz <skurz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> For the specification project:
>
> Jakarta Batch provides the specification document along with the API
> and TCK for describing a means for scheduling, orchestrating, and
> managing batch processes in Jakarta EE applications.


OK, thanks for the feedback.  It looks like I misunderstood and we're looking for simpler scope statements.

So I would now write that more like:
  "Jakarta Batch provides the specification document along with the API and TCK for describing a means for executing and managing batch processes in Jakarta EE applications."
(I'm purposely avoiding using the word "scheduling" since JSR-352 specifically excluded that from our domain).

In trying to work this out, I'd had the thought to move some of the wording you thought fit better into "Description" into "Scope", to make it say more than basically "continue JSR 352".

But if we're going for a simpler scope that's fine.  I haven't participated in enough of the conversations to have a strong opinion here.  

And maybe even something like the scope statement in  https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/eclipse-project-jms is OK.
All that says is: "Eclipse Proeject for JMS provides the API and TCK for Java™ Message Service (JMS) API, starting from the specification defined by JSR-343."

_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc

--

Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.