Re: Procedure suggestion for the 1.1 JSR107 Spec

[Greg Luck]

Jens

Agree with you on putting this on the list. So here we are :)

Rather than release the TCK right now, lets get a bit more done. You were on vacation and now you are back and active. Brian also indicated he would have some time.

So, Jens I suggest you get fixing issues and submit pull requests. Chase me or Brian up and we will review them. 

Regards

Greg Luck

web: http://gregluck.com

skype: gregrluck

mobile US: +1 650 924 6244

mobile Australia: +61 408 061 622

On 8 Mar 2016, at 12:55 AM, Jens Wilke <jens....@headissue.com> wrote:

Greg, Brain,

I checked the JCP pages and as I understand it, it is possible to release a new and fixed TCK any time without
formal process. So I would suggest the following procedure:

- Release the current state of the TCK now, as 1.0.2. There are already some useful changes.

- Do more changes to the TCK and release it as soon as there is something substantial, so everybody can check it and give feedback.

- While "sharpening" the TCK, collect pieces that should be changed in the Spec also in the JSR107 issue tracker.

- Change the Spec

- Add to the Spec that a 1.1 compliant implementation must pass TCK Version 1.1.x or higher

- Do Formal Spec release

I also think it is a good idea to announce the procedure and a rough idea of the schedule on the mailing list.

What do you guys think?

For a matter of openness and transparency, it would make sense to have this discussion itself on the mailing list.
Can we do this or do you prefer private mails on matters like this?

Best,

Jens

--
"Everything superfluous is wrong!"

  // Jens Wilke - headissue GmbH - Germany
\//  https://headissue.com

[Greg Luck]

I am working through them.

Regards

Greg Luck

web: http://gregluck.com

skype: gregrluck

mobile US: +1 650 924 6244

mobile Australia: +61 408 061 622

On 9 Mar 2016, at 12:15 PM, Jens Wilke <jens....@headissue.com> wrote:

On Wednesday 09 March 2016 11:53:26 Greg Luck wrote:

Jens

Agree with you on putting this on the list. So here we are :)

Perfect!

I just went through all TCK issues and commented on everything that had no reaction yet.
So now there is a second thought.

Well, every issue except mine.
So, I don't know whether the stuff I brought up is worthwhile and aiming in the right direction at all :(

Can you guys spent five minutes and put a "+1" or "-1" on all the issues that should be addressed or rejected?

[Jens Wilke]

On Wednesday 09 March 2016 11:53:26 Greg Luck wrote:

> Jens
>
> Agree with you on putting this on the list. So here we are :)

Perfect!

I just went through all TCK issues and commented on everything that had no reaction yet.
So now there is a second thought.

Well, every issue except mine.
So, I don't know whether the stuff I brought up is worthwhile and aiming in the right direction at all :(

Can you guys spent five minutes and put a "+1" or "-1" on all the issues that should be addressed or rejected?

[Jens Wilke]

On Wednesday 09 March 2016 12:16:03 Greg Luck wrote:
> I am working through them.

Well, I wouldn't expect the Spec Lead to work on it, if nobody else wants it.

But... go ahead :)