[1] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg00613.html
[2]
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/wiki/Guide-For-Updating-the-TCK-User-Documentation-(Jakarta-EE-9)
--
Regards
Cesar Hernandez
https://twitter.com/CesarHgt
http://www.tomitribe.com
https://www.tomitribe.io
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 4:46 PM Amelia Eiras <aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I meant to say, the feature to add Contributors to any git
project under the Eclipse Foundation *is a reality* after its
revival in Q1 of 2019 from an almost 4 years sleep - bug.
The bug took +8 months (well worth time prioritizing). For that
time & the result, I am most thankful to Chris and his web team.
Chris is cc'd here as well -- you are amazing Chris!!!
I am now motivated to get back to that blog, finish it & publish
it this month to get more notice *that* such formidable access
exists and it welcomes active contributors to own their weight
in any project without being debt to the Committers of the
project. :)
Happy wknd Scott and Jakartees,
Amelia Eiras
twitter.com/ameliaeiras <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
Tribe:http://tomitribe.com <http://tomitribe.com/>
https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:34 PM Amelia Eiras
<aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hola Scott,
I have been researching a few moments before closing my days
to see a way around this.
In MicroProfile though I am a committer, submitting PRs are
the way to go while collaborating on documentations. It is
easy after forking the repo on my github account.
True that
- to copy/paste changes into a git issue to have others with
access merge those contributions is poor at best OSS etique
& won't enhance nor welcome others to collaborate.
Current issue is a positive step forward for the Jakarta EE
TCK about how it chooses to manage community contributions
updates in the wiki while still keeping healthy control of
the space.
Early this year, I -- with the help of wonderful Christopher
Guindon - Manager, Web Development | Eclipse Foundation and
a few others (not only MicroProfilers)~20 individuals in the
ticket contributing, we revived a +4 years old github bug
that affects positively all the Contributors under the EF:
Bug 483563 - Allow assignment of Github issues to
contributors
<https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=483563>
Since the middle of December last year, active contributors
in any Eclipse project can be added to any Repo. It just
need to be executed by the Project itself.
I owe (got sidetracked with the heavy duty work
collaborating on the creation of the MP working group + MP
is prohibit from releasing MP 4.0 so the blog took a step
back as we have no use for it YET] Chris and the EF web
team the publishing of that blog still, title: [MP
Blog]Adding Contributors to the MP Repository #230
<https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-marketing/issues/230>
How about we use the draft of the blog to pilot with the
Jakarta EE TCK adding me as a contributor to the Repo
itself. The steps are simple enough but THIS awesome new
contributors feature have yet to be tested. I welcomed you
to do some research using the bug tracing -- a few other
tickets were opened/closed to fix the issue and still
protect the projects. :)
I appreciate you, your follow up shows much care Scott, you
are awesome! -- lets try stuff, fail fast, learn/unlearn and
re-try, openly!
Amelia Eiras
twitter.com/ameliaeiras <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
Tribe:http://tomitribe.com <http://tomitribe.com/>
https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:38 PM Scott Marlow
<smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 8/5/20 3:21 PM, Amelia Eiras wrote:
> Scott,
>
> Thank you for sending the links.
> I will start the follow-up via the Wikis later today.
Thank YOU! :)
Amelia,
I found
https://docs.github.com/en/github/building-a-strong-community/adding-or-editing-wiki-pages#adding-or-editing-wiki-pages-locally
today and am sharing the link here in case it helps
you/others.
Following the article instructions I could clone
git@xxxxxxxxxx:eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck.wiki.git but
didn't seem able
to clone
https://github.com/scottmarlow/jakartaee-tck.wiki.git
which was
disappointing.
I haven't yet found out if the wiki web interface
perhaps allows
non-committers to create pull requests on the fly
perhaps somehow.
Scott
>
> Amelia Eiras
> twitter.com/ameliaeiras
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
<https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> Tribe:http://tomitribe.com <http://tomitribe.com/>
> https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
> OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 6:50 AM Scott Marlow
<smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>
> Hola Amelia,
>
> I removed the platform ml from this response as
Kevin Sutter already
> included enough information in his response.
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:27 PM Amelia Eiras
<aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>
> Hola Scott,
>
> I am happy to help the wiki write-up after it
is started :)
>
>
> I started some draft updates to create a few
levels of landing pages
> via
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/wiki.
Please do
> let me know if you are able to create a pull
request for the wiki.
> I tried googling for how non-committers could do
that but didn't
> find a reasonable solution.
>
> I added a question to the Q+A sub-page about how
to add questions
> and answered that questions can be added by
sending mail to the
> Platform TCK mailing list.
>
>
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/wiki/Jakarta-EE-9-Platform-TCK-Questions---Answers
>
>
> Sadly, I always have a conflict at 8am PDT on
Tuesdays so I
> cannot join the Platform calls, however like
you said, there is
> no need to wait to start lowering the bar to
entry.
>
>
> +1
>
> I am most happy to work with you and other
Jakartees on the
> documentation.
>
>
> Thank you!
>
> Lets not wait to have everything figured
out. If we start the
> write up, it is most likely that #ossDOERs by
jumping into help
> with TCK, could help improve the process
itself, I see them
> submitting PRs against the documenation that
in turn helps to
> clarify the reality of HOW TCK Contributing
Works. Mojo is:
> try, fail-fast & openly, learn, unlearn &
reiterate.
>
>
> +1
>
>
> Please pull me in when starting that
write-up. See you in git,
> my ID: aeiras.
>
>
> I included "@aeiras" in the comment for a wiki
page update, I'm not
> sure if that is ignored or processed by github.
>
>
> Abrazos,
>
> Amelia Eiras
> twitter.com/ameliaeiras
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
<https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> Tribe:http://tomitribe.com
<http://tomitribe.com/>
> https://tribestream.io <https://tribestream.io/>
> OSS:http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:23 AM Scott Marlow
<smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>
> Amelia,
>
> Adding platform-dev ml...
>
> The Platform call wasn't scheduled for
today, so perhaps
> next week there
> can be discussion about the below. I did
think more about
> this and
> would like to propose a few adjustments
to give the
> community enough
> time to give feedback but also meet our
schedule constraints.
>
> With regard to Standalone TCK
deliverables, we can easily
> stage new
> builds of each Standalone TCKs, however
we can only promote
> a specific
> versioned Standalone TCK once (with the
last promoted TCK
> version
> targeted for EE 9 final release).
>
> So from a TCK perspective, I propose that
contributors
> review TCK
> documentation and create pull requests
over the next N days,
> where N is
> to be discussed further (perhaps N could
be 10 calendar days
> including
> some non-working days or some other
duration yet to be
> discussed).
>
> Whatever N is for the final date to
create TCK documentation
> pull
> requests by, each SPEC API ballot could
work off of an
> initial promoted
> TCK (e.g. assuming no TCK test failures
and initial TCK doc
> changes are
> merged).
>
> If subsequent TCK documentation pull
requests come in after
> the SPEC API
> ballot, the SPEC lead (or TCK team) could
push a new staged
> Standalone
> TCK update that could then be promoted
with the updated TCK
> documentation.
>
> The only negative is that each Standalone
TCK that is
> promoted after the
> respective SPEC API ballot is approved,
would need to be
> copied to
> http://download.eclipse.org/jakartaee (along with SHA
sum).
>
> I suggest that we start following ^ this
week if no there
> are no reasons
> presented as to why we cannot abide by
the current schedule
> for SPEC API
> ballots and also still merge in further
TCK documentation
> changes from
> the community (while we have time left
for doing that after
> SPEC API
> ballots complete but before EE 9 is final).
>
> More responses inline below.
>
> On 8/3/20 6:24 PM, Amelia Eiras wrote:
> > Scott,
> >
> > I think your explanation is quite
beneficial for
> tomorrow's platform
> > call, beyond that call and its minutes.
> > Releases have a deadline, that means
that expectations
> need to be fluid
> > yet clearly stated to simplify the
process of the
> release. I see you as
> > a Mentor for this thread. :)
>
> Thank you, I think that we all desire to
bring more
> community to the
> Jakarta EE Platform TCK. IMO, we did
very well with getting
> community
> contributions for the big bang "EE 8 ==>
EE 9" changes but
> not as much
> for other TCK changes, which could be a
number of reasons
> (including
> documentation/wiki need to provide more
'how thinks work'
> guidance to
> developers.)
>
> >
> > After I read your reply on the why of
time, I finally
> understood the
> > workaround time-limits, the steps 1,
2... when dealing
> with the TCK.
> > I would go further and ask for us to
start the wiki under
> the TCK
> > documenting this.
>
> +1 I have been thinking that we should
update the initial
> wiki page to
> be a proper landing page that links to
sub-topics, so we can
> have EE 9
> development process topics as well as
user oriented topics
> (really,
> should have no friction against adding
any type of
> sub-topics with no
> limit on amount of nesting).
>
> > With Jakarta EE, the TCK is public yet
its process is
> > a complete vacuum with bare to none
documentation on what
> to expect when
> > contributing to it.
>
> Yes, it is a lot different developing the
TCK than just
> using it, many
> of the contributors may not be users of
the TCKs yet, for those
> contributors it is even harder to
understand the TCK internals.
>
> >
> > Up until now, we have never discussed
the bare minimum
> expectations when
> > TCK contributed. We ought to fix that.
>
> +1
>
> > Related to Jakarta EE contributing--
last week, I was
> candidly asked via
> > a Java public forum on a private slack
group how much
> time was ok to
> > "wait" for a PR review/merge or git
issue accomplishment
> under the
> > Jakarta EE project *before asking for
help*. I said 72hrs
> or so,
> > patience and respect to Contributors
of the project means
> we understand
> > that their time, YOUR, MINE, OURS, is
the most precious
> commodity & a
> > contract if choosing to be a #ossDOER
that wants to have
> impactful
> > contributions.
> >
> > Lastly, I believe candid conversations
lead such as the
> one you are
> > beautifully facilitating lead to
documentation.
> Brainstorming and
> > exchanges such as these ought to make
you and I scalable.
>
> +100 and thanks for taking the time to
contribute here!
>
> I see good
> > ideas, values from those that care to
share *a
> > direct acknowledgement to scale stuff
that is worth
> broadening. * THAT I
> > CARE THE MOST.
>
> +100
> >
> > Hugs,
>
> Ditto and have a great day! :-)
>
> Scott
>
> >
> > Amelia Eiras
> > twitter.com/ameliaeiras
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> > Tribe:http://tomitribe.com
<http://tomitribe.com/>
> > https://tribestream.io
<https://tribestream.io/>
> > OSS:http://microprofile.io
https://jakarta.ee
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 12:03 PM Scott
Marlow
> <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> > <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>>>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 12:59 PM
Amelia Eiras
> <aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hola Scott,
> >
> >
> > Hola Amelia,
> >
> > Thanks for responding!
> >
> >
> > I have bias feedback on how
the window to
> receive feedback ought
> > to be set up.
> > Bare with me and thanks for
brainstorming after
> you consume this
> > message.
> >
> > If an issue/PR is sent on
Friday, do we expect
> the contributors
> > to work on it over the weekend?
> >
> >
> > I agree that we do not want them
to work on it over
> the weekend.
> >
> > If yes, why is that?
> >
> > Should we assume that
contributions ought to
> happen during the
> > work week instead?
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > WHY?
> > the 72 hours period for
example ought not to
> contain the wknd.
> >
> >
> > Whether it is 78 hours or some
other amount of time,
> we still may
> > have additional standalone TCK
documentation pull
> requests that come
> > in after we have "promotion" (e.g.
copied to
> >
>
https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/promoted/jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip)
> > of the respective versioned TCK.
For example, if
> �� >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382
> is promoted
> > on Wednesday instead of Tuesday, a
contributor could
> notice on
> > Thursday that an important TCK
documentation should
> be made, that we
> > could increment the version
> to jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.1.zip and
> > stage/promote that.
> >
> > Fyi, the "stage" term refers to
copying the latest
> nightly TCK build
> > to
> >
>
https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
> > and "promotion" refers to creating
a versioned TCK.
> >
> > I'm not aware of any problems with
promoting multiple
> versions of a
> > TCK, however there could be time
constraints that
> dictate whether to
> > promote a specific TCK again.
> >
> >
> > We as a community can
contribute any day we
> choose to, HOWEVER
> > we ought to be aware AND
PROTECTIVE that weekends
> for many of us
> > are free of professional
work-devices.
> >
> >
> > Another approach could be to start
the time clock now
> by emailing
> > all of the various SPEC API
contributors that their
> feedback on the
> > TCK documentation contained in the
respective TCK zip in
> >
>
https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
> > is welcome in the form of pull
requests on
> >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck. The
> advantage of
> > this approach is that contributors
would have more
> time to contribute.
> >
> > Another advantage of emailing all
SPEC API
> contributors now is that
> > we don't yet have issues for all
of the SPEC API TCKs
> created yet,
> > so sending a generic email to all
could help get the
> message out
> > sooner so the TCK documentation
pull requests can
> come in sooner.
> >
> >
> > As such, I would recommend
that the August 4th
> gets moved to
> > later to honor that weekend
ought not to be
> included (yet are
> > awesome plus to have) on the
window to contribute.
> >
> >
> > Also of importance is to keep the
SPEC API ballots
> moving along and
> > not getting blocked on the
promotion of TCKs, as well
> as not getting
> > blocked on the TCK team creating
the tracking issues
> for promoting TCKs.
> >
> > So, if we delay the August 4th TCK
promotions until
> August 6th and
> > send generic email today to all of
the SPEC API
> mailing lists to
> > review their respective staged TCK
zips (and create
> pull requests on
> >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck for further
> changes
> > that are needed), that might be
more helpful.
> >
> > The following schedule (from Ed's
original email from
> this thread)
> > is what we are trying to achieve
with regard to
> promoting the TCKs:
> >
> > "
> >
> > * Wave 0 (Any time)
> >
> > * Concurrency
> > * Messaging
> > * Persistence
> > * (From the Platform TCK)
> > o Web Services Metadata
> >
> > * Wave 1 (Any time)
> >
> > * Annotations
> > * Expression Language
> > * JSON Processing
> > * Servlet
> > * SOAP with Attachments
> > * WebSocket
> >
> > * Wave 2 (Planned to start July 28)
> >
> > * Authentication
> > * Authorization
> > * JSON Binding
> > * Server Pages
> >
> > * Wave 3 (Planned to start Aug 5)
> >
> > * XML Web Services
> >
> > * Wave 4 (Planned to start Aug 11)
> >
> > * RESTful Web Services
> > * Transaction
> >
> > * Wave 5 (Planned to start Aug 18)
> >
> > * Connectors
> > * Standard Tag Library
> > * (From the Platform TCK)
> > o Enterprise Beans
> > o Enterprise Web Services
> >
> > * Wave 6 (Planned to start Aug 25
> >
> > * Security
> > * Server Faces
> >
> > * Wave 7 (Planned to start Aug 31)
> >
> > * Jakarta EE Web Profile
> > * Jakarta EE Platform
> >
> > "
> >
> >
> >
> > Stay awesome formidable
#ossDOER and happy August
> to everyone here,
> >
> >
> > Thanks, you too! :-)
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > Amelia Eiras
> > twitter.com/ameliaeiras
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
<http://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> <https://twitter.com/ameliaeiras>
> > Tribe:http://tomitribe.com
<http://tomitribe.com/>
> > https://tribestream.io
<https://tribestream.io/>
> > OSS:http://microprofile.io
https://jakarta.ee
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 7:35 AM
Scott Marlow
> <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> > <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at
9:57 PM Scott Marlow
> > <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
> >
> > The committer teams
need to review the
> staged TCK
> > content and give their
> > +1 for the relevant
TCK bundle to be
> promoted. The
> > promotion will
> > freeze the TCK for
release, which
> essentially means it
> > is frozen. If a
> > blocking change in a
TCK is needed, we
> will re-release
> > with a
> > incremented version
number as mentioned
> below.
> >
> > The possible states
that TCKs can
> transition through are:
> >
> > * Staged via
> >
>
https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/staged-900
> >
> > (each TCK zip may be
updated multiple times).
> >
> > * Promoted via
> >
>
https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee9-eftl/promoted
> >
> > (each versioned TCK
zip is frozen
> immediately, further
> > changes can only
> > appear via a version
number increment).
> >
> > * Final release for
Jakarta EE 9 via
> > https://download.eclipse.org/jakartaee/...
> >
> >
> > On 7/27/20 11:21 AM,
Ed Bratt wrote:
> > > Due to how the
Specification Committee
> has defined
> > the process, any
> > > change to the TCK
requires are
> re-release -- Docs.
> > change, Exclude List
> > > change, anything
else that would
> change content
> > and/or generate a build
> > > forces a version
number increment.
> > >
> > > I think the
procedures described below
> will allow us
> > to stop builds,
> > > once a
Specification has gone to
> ballot. So, that's
> > my first concern. We
> > > just need to follow
the ballot
> progress closely and
> > not inadvertently
> > > create an update
that wasn't asked for.
> >
> > From a process point
of view, I think
> that the SPEC API
> >
representative/lead/committers can help
> determine when
> > it is time for
> > the relevant TCK to
transition from
> Staged to Promoted
> > state.
> >
> > Question, if we don't
hear feedback from
> a SPEC lead or
> > committers, who
> > can make the decision
to proceed with
> Promoting the
> > TCK? Also how long
> > should we wait for
feedback?
> >
> >
> > There is no perfect amount
of time to wait
> for feedback, if
> > we make it too short, we
may need to
> stage/promote a newer
> > standalone TCK version for
further changes.
> If we make it
> > too long, we may never
hear feedback and could
> > jeopardize the EE 9 schedule.
> >
> > I'm thinking that we can
wait a few days
> after pinging the
> > SPEC API teams (whether it
is sending email
> or pinging
> > lead(s)).
> >
> > For example, for
> >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382 we
> > sent email to
ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>> <mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ca-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
> > on Friday July 31 and will
> >
promote jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip
> first thing on
> > Tuesday August 4, 2020 if
we do not hear
> feedback.
> >
> > Worse case, we could later
stage
> >
a jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.1.zip if
> further TCK pull
> > requests for documentation
changes are important.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > Good news, it is now
time for Staged
> >
jakarta-annotations-tck-2.0.0.zip
> > to be reviewed via
> >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/382.
> > Feedback is
> > welcome (link to
staged TCK zip is in the
> issue)!
> >
> > Also good news, it is
now time for Staged
> >
jakarta-expression-language-tck-4.0.0.zip
> to be reviewed
> > via
> >
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/387.
> >
> > Once the relevant SPEC
API lead and/or
> committers has
> > given their
> > approval via the
relevant jakartaee-tck
> issue, we will
> > Promote the
> > related TCK.
> >
> > We have created some
other similar
> "Review and promote "
> > tracking issues
> > for other TCKs but
help is needed to
> created tracking
> > issues for other
> > TCKs still (open
> >
>
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+Review+and+promote
> >
> > for current issues).
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> > jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> >
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
> > To unsubscribe from this
list, visit
> >
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> > jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
> > To unsubscribe from this list,
visit
> >
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> > jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>>
> > To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> >
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
> >
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
> > jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
> >
>
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
