Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] BALLOT: Approval to release Jakarta Persistence 3.0

Hi,

This ballot will likely not conclude successfully due to the discrepancies with the TCK bundle. 
I recommend that the project team withdraws this review request.

I am not sure if I, as a mentor, can formally withdraw the request as the JESP states:
  • A ballot will be declared invalid and concluded immediately in the event that the Specification Team withdraws from the corresponding review.
If the mentor is regarded as part of the Specification Team, then consider this ballot as declared invalid. 

Ivar

On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 1:49 AM Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hopefully, this is just a typo on the CR and TCK Results with the SHA value.  But, since both of these are referencing the final resting place of the TCK zip file, we can't tell which one was used for the compatibility testing.  Nice catch, Jean-Louis!

And, when this is resolved, we should move the final TCK zip to the "promoted" directory instead of the "staged-9000" directory.  And, we need to ensure that we're referencing the correct file name in the CR and TCK Results:  jakarta-persistence-tck-3.0.0.zip, not eclipse-persistence-tck-3.0.0.zip.

Lukas/Ivar, I would suggest pulling this ballot, make these (hopefully) minor updates, and re-start the ballot.  Thanks.

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:        Jean-Louis Monteiro <jlmonteiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        09/30/2020 17:49
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec] BALLOT: Approval to release Jakarta        Persistence 3.0
Sent by:        jakarta.ee-spec-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




-1 (Tomitribe)

The TCK up for vote does not match the TCK for the Certification Request

TCK up for vote:

 - b08c8887f00306f8bb7ebe54c4c810f3452519f5395733637ccc639b5081aebf

TCK used for Certification Request:

 - cf3edd0beb435ae3b7a443ddb097e5434e7d3530ea47d6d003ffa53eb988bc7f

That's unfortunately a show stopper.  We need a Certification Request that matches the TCK binary put up for vote.

As a follow up of the discussion today, it looks like EclipseLink used for the Certification Request is a milestone and not a snapshot which is awesome.

I have noticed a couple of branding issues in the TCK (zip) with "Java EE" and "RI". But this is not why we are voting -1.
We should fix those if possible now or in a maintenance release to avoid delays.


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com


On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 5:37 PM Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1 (PMC)


On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 5:25 PM Scott Stark <starksm64@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1 Red Hat


On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 7:47 AM Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Greetings Jakarta EE Specification Committee.

I need your vote to approve and ratify the release of Jakarta Persistence as part of the Jakarta EE Platform 9 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/246  
https://deploy-preview-246--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app/

Per the process, this will be a fourteen-day ballot, ending on Wednesday October 14th, 2020 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, Red Hat, Tomitribe, and Primeton), 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 …


-- 

Ivar Grimstad

Jakarta EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Community. Code. Collaboration. 


Join us at our virtual event: EclipseCon 2020- October 20-22

_______________________________________________
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


--

Ivar Grimstad

Jakarta EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Community. Code. Collaboration. 


Join us at our virtual event: EclipseCon 2020- October 20-22

_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec


--

Ivar Grimstad

Jakarta EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Community. Code. Collaboration. 

Join us at our virtual event:
EclipseCon 2020 - October 20-22


Back to the top