Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [EXTERNAL] Re: Release plan revisions to mi

[Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 15/01/2024 20:20, Ed Burns via jakartaee-platform-dev wrote:
> Hello Alasdair,
>
> Thanks for spotting this important nuance. This was a misunderstanding 
> on my part and a text-review failure on the part of my 
> release-coordinator assistant team’s part.
>
> Here is the corrected text.
>
> *Executive Summary*
>
>   * Platform project *keeps the June/July 2024 target* for having an EE
>     11 Ratifying Compatible Implementation.
>   * Platform project adjusts JDK compilation requirements:
>       o *Component spec TCKs and platform TCK must compile under 17*.
>       o *A compatible component impl must pass their component TCK when
>         run under 17 or 21.*
>           + To ratify a component specification, there must exist an
>             implementation that passes on 17. There must also exist an
>             implementation that passes on 21.
>           + These need not be the same implementation. There can be one
>             implementation that passes on 17 and a different one that
>             passes on 21.
>       o *A compatible platform impl must pass the platform TCK when run
>         under 17 or 21.*
>           + To ratify a platform specification, there must exist an
>             implementation that passes on 17. There must also exist an
>             implementation that passes on 21.
>           + These need not be the same implementation. There can be one
>             implementation that passes on 17 and a different one that
>             passes on 21.
>       o This is the same situation as was the case with Jakarta EE 10.
>         For EE 10, it was JDK 11 and 17. For EE 11 it is JDK 17 and 21. 

Whoa!

This is a HUGE change. It effectively means that the minimum Java 
runtime required to be supported has changed from Java 21 to Java 17. It 
is way too late in the process for such a change.

And if the argument is that the minimum runtime version requirement 
hasn't changed, what is the point in requiring anything to work with 
Java 17 if the minimum runtime is Java 21?

Mark



>   * Platform project adjusts "release review" targets for component
>     specs: *move "release review" targets all out by one month* relative
>     to the schedule sent to Spec Project Leads on 2023-12-13
>     <https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-spec-project-leads/msg00851.html>.
>       o Wave 1, 2, 3, 4 specs release review by 2024-02-29
>       o M2 release
>       o Wave 5 specs release review by 2024-03-29
>       o M3 release
>       o Wave 6, 7 specs release review by 2024-04-27
>       o M4 release
>   * The key condition to make this plan possible: the GlassFish
>     community is willing and able to deliver an implementation of EE 11
>     compiled under 17, but passing the platform TCK under 17 and also
>     21. *The release coordinators expect more community involvement on
>     the Jakarta Data implementation for GlassFish, especially from Red
>     Hat, to achieve this goal.*
>
> *Details*
>
> On 2023-12-20, Red Hat opened gh-platform-820 
> <https://github.com/jakartaee/platform/issues/820>. This issue requests, 
> "there still must be support for Java SE 17 as a valid runtime for 
> certification." We spent the 2024-01-09 platform project call discussing 
> this issue. Since then, the release coordinators have been working to 
> revise the release plan to accommodate this request, while preserving 
> the delivery schedule and maintaining buy-in from implementation vendors.
>
> We believe the revised plan achieves this objective. We ask you to read 
> it and understand it carefully. If you think it's unachievable, now is 
> the best time to say it.
>
> We will discuss this tomorrow. We aim to modify the Jakarta EE 11 
> Release Plan 
> <https://jakartaee.github.io/platform/jakartaee11/JakartaEE11ReleasePlan> right after the meeting and convey the changes to the spec and steering committees.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ed and Arjan
>
> P.S. The long-standing policy of considering specification binaries, in 
> maven central or anywhere else, as a non-normative convenience remains 
> unchanged. The platform project is silent on this matter. But because 
> the platform project*does*mandate a specific JDK requirement for 
> compatible implementations passing the component or platform TCK, 
> specification binaries are practically constrained to follow that mandate.
>
> | edburns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:edburns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> | office: +1 954 
> 727 1095
>
> | Calendar Booking: https://aka.ms/meetedburns <https://aka.ms/meetedburns>
>
> |
>
> | Please don't feel obliged to read or reply to this e-mail outside
>
> | of your normal working hours.
>
> |
>
> | Reply anonymously to this email: 
> https://purl.oclc.org/NET/edburns/contact 
> <https://purl.oclc.org/NET/edburns/contact>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
> jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev