Also Jakarta EE platform will need to incorporate projects that are not part of EE4J e.g. CDI, BV and JBatch.
Steve
From: jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Werner Keil
Sent: 14 August 2018 17:06
To: Jakara EE community discussions <jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Am i right with the representation in the diagram?
Nice, so somewhere (probably next to the PMC) you should also have the IP/legal team.
It interacts both with Jakarta EE and EE4J (or individual projects) because 3rd party libraries that each of those projects consume also have to be approved and checked via a CQ.
I don't think "govern" would be the right term there but "advice" or "councel" seem best;-)
Thanks for the feedback.. Updated the org
For more confusion the IP/Legal committee is an Eclipse Foundation Board committee not a Jakarta EE committee.
IMHO;
Jakarta EE Working Group governs the Jakarta EE brand and what can be called Jakarta EE.
EE4J governs all the projects under the EE4J top level project. These things aren’t a simple overlap.
See an article I wrote a while back
https://dzone.com/articles/how-decisions-are-made-jakarta-ee-and-eclipse-micr things may have evolved since then!
Steve
From:
jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Werner Keil
Sent: 14 August 2018 16:20
To: Jakara EE community discussions <jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-community] Am i right with the representation in the diagram?
Being in the Specification Committee I know, the term "Reference Implementation" is disregarded in favor of "Specification Implementation". It is still a standard implementation
by Eclipse Foundation projects (or some could also be elsewhere e.g. at Apache Foundation) but not a Reference Implementation in JCP terms.
There is also at least an IP/legal Committee which currently has a hard time in certain terms of legal questions like opening up the TCK, etc.
This has always been a bit confusing. However, I would say that the Jakarta EE Working Group governs the platform and its specification/api projects. The EE4J governs the reference
implementations (e.g. Glassfish) under its umbrella (some are not owned by eclipse). And the PMC governs the EE4J. As to weather or not the PMC governs the Jakarta EE Working Group has never been entirely clear to me since the PMC formed it.
Also missing are the Jakarta EE Specification Committee and Jakarta EE Marketing Committee which are themselves managed by the Jakarta EE Steering Committee which none of which
is really managed by the PMC as they are industry groups.
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-community mailing list
jakarta.ee-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-community
|
