I vote for option 3.
I feel option 2 is going too much in the direction of "check the fine print". Option 1 frankly I don't like for aesthetic reasons, but also with David's points in mind it does end up marking certain impls as special (although like Ivar my first reaction to
seeing an asterisk is a negative one).
Option 3 is a nice compromise between the two.
Andrew Pielage
Java Developer at Payara Services Ltd
Payara -
Supported Enterprise Software for Jakarta EE and MicroProfile Applications
From: jakarta.ee-spec <jakarta.ee-spec-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Paul Buck <paul.buck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 22 March 2021 18:00
To: Jakarta specification discussions <jakarta.ee-spec@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [jakarta.ee-spec] [Ballot] - Denoting which implementation was used to ratify a specification
The Specification Committee has discussed the proposal to demote on a specification page which open source implementation was used during ratification of the specification during a Release Review. There have been robust discussions on the mailing
list and in meetings. Four options emerged which I have listed below. They have been mocked up by Ivar, see the PRs. Option 4 has no PR since it is the "do nothing" choice. Options:
|