| Re: [jaxws-dev] PR to update Jakarta XML WS for 3.0 release HTML and pdf version |
This is not the best starting point as it is sort of a special case -
this spec has no binary, no tcks, no javadoc; xml binding, soap, or even
annotations would have been better ones to start with.
It is better to include javadoc directly in the spec PR - create one PR
instead of two, see ie https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/231
Hi
On 7/28/20 4:51 AM, Cesar Hernandez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As part of the work that is going on on the
> https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/ releases.
> I was assigned to review the PR for Jakarta Enterprise WS 2.0 [1] and
> also for Jakarta XML WS 3.0 but I couldn't find an open PR for Jakarta
> XML WS 3.0.
an open PR for Jakarta XML WS 3.0 is/was not there since it has not been
created, the reason being vacations during last week.
> I don't know at this point if the PR for
> github.com/jakartaee/specifications/
> <http://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/> should only be done by
> spec lead, but I created a draft PR [0] that I hope will help, feel
> free to reply in the PR if I need to delete it or not:
> <https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/240>
it does not make much sense to me to create a PR without final binaries
of the API available (enterprise ws has no APIs) as most of the stuff
needed for the PR comes from or is related to binaries. I also prefer to
have those "new" APIs at least briefly tested on the implementation side
- and this takes time. Also note that there is a work on the spec doc
being done this week.
>
> The above draft PR has a PDF and an HTML spec version that I generated
> locally with the following PR to update Jakarta XML WS for 3.0 release
> HTML and pdf version:
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jax-ws-api/pull/134/files
>
> I based the work on a PR used for Jakarta Enterprise WS 2.0 [2]
This is not the best starting point as it is sort of a special case -
this spec has no binary, no tcks, no javadoc; xml binding, soap, or even
annotations would have been better ones to start with.
>
> I couldn't perform the Javadoc update to complete [0], but as usual,
> this can be done in a separate PR.
It is better to include javadoc directly in the spec PR - create one PR
instead of two, see ie https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/231
thanks,
--lukas
>
> [0] https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/240
> [1] https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/228
> [2] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jax-ws-api/pull/133
> --
> Regards
> Cesar Hernandez
> https://twitter.com/CesarHgt
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> https://www.tomitribe.io
>
> _______________________________________________
> jaxws-dev mailing list
> jaxws-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jaxws-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jaxws-dev mailing list
jaxws-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jaxws-dev