Skip to content
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 2.1 spec #427

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 26, 2022
Merged

Jakarta Activation 2.1 spec #427

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 26, 2022

Conversation

lukasj
Copy link
Contributor

@lukasj lukasj commented Nov 3, 2021

Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann lukas.jungmann@oracle.com

Specification PR template

When creating a specification project release review, create PRs with the content defined as follows.

Include the following in the PR:

Note: If any item does not apply, check it and mark N/A below it.

Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Nov 3, 2021

✔️ Deploy Preview for jakartaee-specifications ready!

🔨 Explore the source changes: 9335c6a

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/jakartaee-specifications/deploys/61bc4afdf751160007275e16

😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-427--jakartaee-specifications.netlify.app

@ivargrimstad ivargrimstad added the release review Use this label on PRs that are filed for release review label Nov 16, 2021
@lukasj lukasj marked this pull request as ready for review December 1, 2021 11:55
Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lukasj commented Dec 1, 2021

This is now ready.

@jeanouii jeanouii added the wave:1 Used for release tracking purposes label Dec 16, 2021
@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

jeanouii commented Dec 16, 2021

Spec Review Checklist

  1. Spec PR
  1. _index.md
  1. javadocs
  • Footer contains Eclipse copyright and link to license
  • ESFL license is included, usually as doc-files/speclicense.html
  • no META-INF directory in PR
  • javadocs-jar artifact matches apidocs (optional for this release)
  1. Spec PDF
  • Correct spec title
  • Version number of the form x.y, not x.y.z
  • Correct Eclipse copyright line
  • No DRAFT or SNAPSHOT
  • Correct Logo
  1. Spec HTML
  • Same as PDF
  1. TCK zip file
  • README file (optional for this release)
  • EFTL license file, preferably named LICENSE.md
  • User's Guide (or equivalent documentation)
  • How to test the Compatible Implementation(s) listed in _index.md above with the TCK (may be in UG)
  1. TCK User's Guide (or equivalent documentation)
  • Software requirements listed
  • Installation and configuration described
  • How to run tests
  • Where to file challenges
  1. Compatibility certification request
  • Request follows template
  • SHA-256 fingerprint matches staged TCK zip file
  • Request issue has certification label.
  1. TCK results summary
  • Page is hosted by Compatible Implementation project
  • Includes all information from certification request
  • Summary includes number of tests passed, failed, errors
  • SHA-256 fingerprint matches staged TCK zip file on cert request
  1. If a Release Review is required, the specification project team contacts the EMO to initiate the review by sending an email to emo@eclipse.org.
    (A Release Review is not required if the current release is a Service Release based on a previously successful Major or Minor
    release as indicated by a release record on the project's Releases page, e.g., the Jakarta Servlet releases page.)

  2. Update Jakarta EE API jar

  • Update the Jakarta EE API jar by submitting a PR to the jakartaee-api project that updates the version number of your API jar file.

@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

Some comments while doing the review

  • the html and pdf version is mentioning both 2.0 and 2.1 - wondering if the 2.0 got added by mistake. Can someone clarify what is supposed to be there or not?
  • should the _index.md mention «  (under development) »
  • date seems to be outdated in _index.md
  • Release review template missing in _index.md

@ivargrimstad
Copy link
Member

Some comments while doing the review

  • the html and pdf version is mentioning both 2.0 and 2.1 - wondering if the 2.0 got added by mistake. Can someone clarify what is supposed to be there or not?

Good catch, the title should be 2.1

  • should the _index.md mention «  (under development) »

No, the (under development) should be removed

  • date seems to be outdated in _index.md

This is the publish date for the file to be displayed on the website, so April 15 is actually correct

  • Release review template missing in _index.md

You, @jeanouii , will add that template with the results when the ballot has completed

Signed-off-by: Lukas Jungmann <lukas.jungmann@oracle.com>
@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lukasj commented Dec 17, 2021

feedback addressed

@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks guys.
I'll continue the review today if possible and send an update as promised to the spec mailing list

starksm64 pushed a commit to starksm64/specifications that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2021
@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

No logo for HTML as opposed to PDF spec doc.

I have finished the review now and it all looks good to me.
I can start the ballot as we discussed last week. I'll send over an email with some status.

@jeanouii jeanouii self-requested a review December 23, 2021 00:05
Copy link
Contributor

@jeanouii jeanouii left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ballot sent today with a 4 week vote period due to end of the year. Adding ballot label to this PR

@jeanouii jeanouii added the ballot Delivered to the Specification Committee for ballot label Dec 28, 2021
@jeanouii jeanouii added approved The ballot was approved by the Specification Committee and removed ballot Delivered to the Specification Committee for ballot release review Use this label on PRs that are filed for release review labels Jan 26, 2022
@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

Merging this one and I'll create another PR with the results.
Thanks everyone for putting this together and for voting

@jeanouii jeanouii merged commit 6984c40 into jakartaee:master Jan 26, 2022
@jeanouii
Copy link
Contributor

jeanouii commented Jan 26, 2022

adds this final checklist to the main PR.

  • adds the approved label to the PRs, and sends out the Ballot Summary per this template to the public Jakarta EE Specification Committee email list
  • calculates the staged EFTL TCK signature and promotes it to the committee download area using the https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-spec-committee/job/promote-release/ job. Manually editing the jenkins Build Information will help identify the build (ie. Mail 2.0 or CDI 3.0).
  • merges the specification (and apidocs) PRs, ensuring the "date:" field in the _index.md file has an appropriate value to allow publishing.
  • updates the specification page with the ballot results. This is normally done via a separate PR that should be reviewed, approved, and merged.
  • notifies the EMO of the ballot results by email to emo@eclipse-foundation.org. Just forward the ballot summary note sent earlier to the public Spec Committee email list.
  • creates an issue in the specification project that includes the following checklist for the specification project team: Final steps for Jakarta Activation 2.1 jaf-api#89

@lukasj lukasj deleted the jaf21 branch January 28, 2022 15:26
@lukasj lukasj mentioned this pull request Feb 23, 2022
14 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved The ballot was approved by the Specification Committee wave:1 Used for release tracking purposes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants