-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 79
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Jakarta Activation 2.0 spec #172
Conversation
Deploy preview for jakartaee-specifications ready! Built with commit 3dda7af https://deploy-preview-172--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lukasj Are you really trying to push through the official final review at this time? Since that requires a formal ballot (and time and effort), I would recommend that you just change this to a progress review. This will be much easier to get through the process at this point. Some of the review comments reflect this "milestone state" of delivery. Thanks!
@lukasj, can I get confirmation that you plan to move forward with the "final" Activation 2.0 release (instead of performing a "milestone" release)? I think that approach is fine. I just want to get this PR and the apidocs PR #173 to be filed against the proper github milestone (Jakarta EE 9 va Jakarta EE 9 Milestone 1). Thanks! |
Yes, I do. But given that the ballot has been postponed, I will create another PR for the milestone since staged final artifacts will be automatically dropped in few days and milestone needs to include something |
Although I started this review before Milestone 1, I'm going to hand this off to @starksm64 as the official "mentor" for getting Jakarta Activation through the final review process. I've assigned this Issue to Scott for further reviewing. Questions? Don't hesitate to ask. Thanks! |
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
Spec Review Checklist
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Made a quick first pass, @lukasj. Thanks!
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
@kwsutter your feedback has been addressed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The user guide is referring to using Java SE 9 rather than 8. Section 4.1 on configuring the TCK against the RI talks about locations that do not exist in the TCK dist:
<TS_HOME>/bin/ts.jte - this looks to be <TS_HOME>/lib/ts.jte
<TS_HOME>/tools/ant/bin - there is no tools directory
<TS_HOME>/bin/build.xml - this looks to be <TS_HOME>/build.xml
@starksm64 TCK should be fixed |
The Certification Request issue jakartaee/jaf-api#40 lists Java SE 11. I think this has changed since. Even if it does run on SE 11, we need to list SE 8 since that is now the requirement. Please review and confirm the TCK results demonstrate compatibility on SE 8. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks, @lukasj!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops, spoke too soon... The javadoc is missing the EFSL reference in the footer (as mentioned in the checklist). Also, not a requirement in the checklist, but there is no version specified in the rendered javadoc. Simple enough update since you have to add the EFSL reference anyway... Thanks!
btw release date in the spec is apparently wrong now - it was expected to be April 2020 but at this point it is clear that even September is going to be very hard to make. Can someone suggest reasonable date I should update this (and everything depending on this) to? Thanks. |
We have been using September 2020.
…On 8/26/2020 2:55 PM, Lukas Jungmann wrote:
btw release date in the spec is apparently wrong now - it was expected
to be April 2020 but at this point it is clear that even September is
going very hard to make. Can someone suggest /reasonable/ date I
should update this (and everything depending on this) to? Thanks.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/172*issuecomment-681143853__;Iw!!GqivPVa7Brio!NHAOqRRe3rOQYkVwLb9PDAcCPBOkZyuOBjmCLodT-vglFi5KrUuwtxFKKSjJYxQ$>,
or unsubscribe
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC5WM3R5XHUP57LDRQOPUZDSCWADJANCNFSM4NQ2J7UA__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!NHAOqRRe3rOQYkVwLb9PDAcCPBOkZyuOBjmCLodT-vglFi5KrUuwtxFK32jcBYI$>.
|
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
the spec has been refreshed, now the date is at least after RC3. What exact date should I put into index.md (2020-08-15 is in the past) and on the project page (2020-08-01 is in the past as well). Thanks. |
Ok, this looks good to me at this point. |
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
My best shot dates were being missed since the mid April as I had no idea when there will be a reviewer having time to finish the review. This time I set Sept. 30 given that ballot, which has not been started yet needs 2 weeks (so were at Sept 10 if the ballot starts today) + at least a week is needed to follow all the required steps for the release (release review as such needs a week, that is Sept 17). Note that not having final version of activation in maven central is starting to seriously block my work in other projects depending on this one |
Can't quite tell from reading what the expected status should be. Looks like this PR is still in milestone status; spec says RC1, there's are no TCK or compatible implementation links in the _index.md Not sure however as it's been marked |
@dblevins one needs concrete pointers to each problem you see in order to say what is wrong and eventually fix it. From what I can see:
Did you forget to |
@starksm64 @kwsutter If there are no more comments can you start the ballot? This is a spec many other specs depend on. It would be nice to get it released asap and unblock them. |
Comments withdrawn. Looks like I was looking in the annotations/2.0 directory not the activation/2.0 directory. That explains my confusion. Reviewing the changes it looks good. The one thing I'd request is we use a similar description for the compatible implementation like we did for the Activation 1.2 page "Eclipse implementation of Jakarta Activation 2.0" rather than "Jakarta Activation." On the Apache side we also have an implementation of Activation and it doesn't really have a name either, so we would more than likely follow the format and put "Apache implementation of Jakarta Activation 2.0" |
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
@dblevins fixed |
@lukasj thanks for the fast turnaround and sorry again for my prior confusion! |
This one looks ready for ballot. @starksm64, will you do the honors as the mentor for this Specification PR? Thanks! |
Ballot email has been sent |
The specification vote has passed. |
|
Specification PR template
When creating a specification project release review, create two PRs with the content divided as follows.
Include the following in PR#1:
https://github.com/jakartaee/specification-committee/blob/master/spec_page_template.md
a Compatible Implementation and TCK, to ensure that the spec is
implementable and testable.
is complete, passes the TCK, and that the TCK includes sufficient
coverage of the specification. The TCK users guide MUST include
the instructions to run the compatible implementations used to
validate the release. Instructions MAY be by reference.
https://jakarta.oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/staging/jakarta/activation/jakarta.activation-api/2.0.0/
http://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jaf/tck/eftl/jakarta-activation-tck-2.0.0.zip
Compatibility certification request for EE4J implementation of Jakarta Activation jaf-api#40
Include the following in PR#2: