Jakarta EE Platform Call

Date: 2022-07-19

Present:

• Ivar Grimstad (Eclipse Foundation)
• Jared Anderson (IBM)
• Tom Watson (IBM)
• Lukas Jungmann (Oracle)
• Emily Jiang (IBM)
• Brian Stansberry (Red Hat)
• John Clingan (Red Hat)
• Scott Stark (Red Hat)
• Arjan Tijms (OmniFish)
• Jan Westerkamp (iJUG)
• Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle)
• Ryan Cuprak (Jakarta EE Ambassadors)
• Jim Krueger (IBM)
• Werner Keil (Committers, Jakarta EE Ambassadors)
• BJ Hargrave (IBM)
• Cesar Hernandez (Tomtribe)
• Kenji Kazumura (Fujitsu)

Agenda and Minutes

Jakarta EE 10 Status (standing agenda item)

See items below.

RESTful TCK updates and Core Profile

• 3.1.1 version has been staged, in testing
  • Looking good. No dependencies on Servlet/Security
• Will need update of Core Profile TCK
• Scott will send out a message when this is ready
• Ivar will promote it when Scott has verified

CDI TCK

• The Arquillian plugin we are using depends on Servlet being present on the server
• The implementation must include “a protocol” the client test can communicate with the server under test.
• The default protocol for the Arquillian plugin is http
• There are other protocols available, such as JMX
• Any protocol can be used, Options:
  • 1. Add simple servlet support to impl
  • 1. Change the Arquillian adapter to support a protocol to use
• Is it ok to ratify the specification with an implementation that contains Servlet? Or do we have to validate with an implementation that doesn’t?
• OpenLiberty team will try to modify their aquillian adapter to use a REST endpoint rather than Servlet
  • https://github.com/OpenLiberty/liberty-arquillian
    • Maybe update it to rely on Jakarta REST instead of using Servlet
• DECISION: Not a blocker for the release of Core Profile since it is about how to configure/implement the vendor specific adapter for the TCK

Concurrency TCK solution for Web Profile

• https://github.com/jakartaee/concurrency/pull/250
• Still need a 3.0.2 TCK release
• A 3.0.1 TCK release is also in the works, but there is a conflict
• Scott will email on the spec committee mailing list to get a yes/no for the approach we’re taking, i.e. release 3.0.2 of the TCK. Send answer to cu-list as well.

Platform ballot ready?

• Need the specification updated to final
• Scott will generate new spec documents later today

Independent releases of profiles/platform

• Complication is standalone TCKs that are used in more than one
• Should we release them independently?
  • How far away are we from Web- and Core Profiles?
• DECISION
  • Wait for a resolution for the “concurrency issue” above
  • Platform and Web Profile can go to ballot then
  • Core Profile go whenever ready