Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Get clarity on process for obtaining consent to add a spec to EE11
First things first — huge praise for the list conversation!


On Jul 11, 2023, at 4:40 PM, Edward Burns via jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Given this cursory research, I have some questions. Please feel free to reply with in-line annotations.
  • How much latitude do I have as release co-coordinator in conducting the discussions

Huge latitude.  Feel free to experiment with ways to get people to speak up and weigh in.
  • and deciding on new specs to add to EE 11? 

Ultimately, including a new spec would be something that’d go into a Plan Review gain approval via the ballot.  So really, none of us individually have that latitude, but we all have it together.

In terms of deciding what goes into a plan review, that’s really a project decision and the Spec Committee tries to give flexibility on how projects make those decisions.

If we want the Plan Review to succeed, anything that could be contentious should get discussed first — ideally in some list form and not just with the few that can attend meetings.

We don’t have a set-in-stone process in this project.  Back to the first point, you have great latitude in how you get agreement (and of course people have great latitude to disagree with the approach).  Ultimately, anything that makes people feel included and heard usually goes over fine.

Finally, here is my proposal for how I want to conduct new spec discussion and decision. For each of the potential new specs (MVC, Data, JNoSQL)
  • Start a time-bound DISCUSS thread on the list. I suggest 14 days.

A discuss thread is a great start.  I can see the 14 day discussion period being contentious.  If we had a little time (or had started the discussion earlier), I’d recommend we let the conversation go till it everyone is talked out and it goes quiet for a few days in a row.

I’ll note that we do have time if we wanted it.  An approach to that would be to simply say in our Plan Review that we’re considering adding specs x, y, and z.  Then we take the time we think we need and voluntarily submit a Progress Review.

We haven’t actually used a Progress Review in this project yet and they are optional, but it is a great way to defer some decisions we felt should have gone into a Plan Review.

That all said, I’d still try what you mention as plan A and deferring as plan B.  I think it will be pretty clear if the discussion is still  active when the 14 days is done.
  • At the end of the DISCUSS thread, send new emails to point to the chosen ranked choice polling tool to conduct the ballots. I plan to have two ballots, in sequence, that allow voters to rank their desired choices.
    • In/Out for all possible combinations of MVC, Data, JNoSQL, without regard to which platform spec they will go into.
    • With the winners from the In/Out ballot, another ballot that determines what platform spec they will go into.
    • I'll let the voting go for one week.

I’m a huge supporter of ranked-choice voting for things where there is a limit to how many winners there can be.  In this case, we’re not constrained and “no winners” needs to be a valid option.

I.e. if people can only cast votes for a spec to be included and can’t vote against a spec being included, how would that work?














Back to the top