-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Add remaing minutes for 2024 (#1011)
- Loading branch information
1 parent
a742692
commit b23c2b7
Showing
3 changed files
with
238 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ | ||
| # Jakarta EE Platform Call | ||
|
|
||
| Date: 2024-12-10 | ||
| Present: | ||
|
|
||
| - James Perkins (Red Hat) | ||
| - John Clingan (Red Hat) | ||
| - Ed Burns (Microsoft) | ||
| - Jared Anderson (IBM) | ||
| - Kyle Aure (IBM) | ||
| - Emily Jiang (IBM) | ||
| - Anand NK (IBM) | ||
| - Nathan Rauh (IBM) | ||
| - Tom Watson (IBM) | ||
| - Petr Aubrecht (Payara) | ||
| - Arjan Tijms (OmniFish) | ||
| - Jan Westerkamp (iJUG) | ||
| - Gurunandan Rao(Oracle) | ||
| - Scott Stark (Red Hat) | ||
| - Scott Marlow (Red Hat) | ||
| - Ed Bratt (Oracle) | ||
|
|
||
| Agenda and Minutes | ||
|
|
||
| ### Top of mind for Ed, Arjan, Jared | ||
|
|
||
| * No meeting on 2024-12-24, 2024-12-31. | ||
| * First meeting in CY2025 will be 2025-01-07. | ||
| * BALLOT for excluding tests: | ||
| * \#\# \-1 votes 5 | ||
|
|
||
| \-1, Ed Bratt | ||
|
|
||
| \-1, \-- Dmitry | ||
|
|
||
| \-1, Emily | ||
|
|
||
| \-1 (iJUG), Jan | ||
|
|
||
| \-1 Alasdair | ||
|
|
||
| \#\# \+1 votes 4 | ||
|
|
||
| \+1, Arjan Tijms | ||
|
|
||
| \+1. Scott Stark | ||
|
|
||
| \+1, Lenny Primak | ||
|
|
||
| \+1, Scott Marlow | ||
|
|
||
| \# 0 votes 1 | ||
|
|
||
| 0, Kenji Kazumura | ||
| Ed will close this ballot as not passing. | ||
|
|
||
| Example of the code: | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| **private** **void** addBeanForMetamodel(AfterBeanDiscovery afterBeanDiscovery, PersistenceUnitDescriptor descriptor) { | ||
| addQualifiedBean(afterBeanDiscovery, descriptor, Metamodel.**class**) | ||
| .scope(Dependent.**class**) | ||
| .createWith(e \-\> getEntityManagerFactory(descriptor).getMetamodel()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| **private** EntityManagerFactory getEntityManagerFactory(PersistenceUnitDescriptor descriptor) { | ||
| **return** CDI.*current*().select( | ||
| EntityManagerFactory.**class**, | ||
| descriptor.getQualifiers() | ||
| .stream() | ||
| .map(e \-\> *createAnnotationInstance*(loadClass(e))) | ||
| .toArray(Annotation\[\]::**new**)) | ||
| .get(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| * Strategy for putting Web Profile to ballot in CY25Q1, separately from Platform Profile | ||
| * The Platform Project requests the Platform TCK project to give top priority to getting the Web Profile tests passing. | ||
| * It looks like we will not be able to bring the Web Profile to ballot in CY2024. However, it is still useful to focus on Web Profile, bring it to ballot, and then do Platform Profile. | ||
| * Besides passing all Web Profile tests, the long pole remaining is getting in the Persistence CDI integration tests as documented in [issue 1405](https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/issues/1405). | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/pull/1686](https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/pull/1686) and [https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/pull/1687](https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/pull/1687) merged in | ||
| * PRs merged include qualifier scenarios, but doesn’t actually use the artifacts that are injected to make sure that they are the right injected instances for the qualifiers. The test just validates that injection happens, but not the content of the injected value. | ||
| * Custom scope testing is not included yet. | ||
| * Scott Stark and Scott Marlow | ||
| * Has agreed to shift focus to resolve the issues blocking the completion of Web Profile tests passing GlassFish 8.0 JDK 17\. | ||
| * Ed asked for a swag estimate for doing this. | ||
| * Scott enumerated three big tasks: | ||
| * 1\. Get the remaining tests passing. | ||
| * Approximately 206 Persistence non platform test failures to resolve | ||
| * TCK call will look at the full set of Web Profile tests that are remaining to be passed. | ||
| * ACTION: Ed to obtain concrete estimate and update dashboard: [https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/12/views/1](https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/12/views/1) | ||
| * 2\. Produce, for the first time ever, a separate independent Web Profile TCK distribution. | ||
| * 3\. Create the CCR for GlassFish for the Web Profile using the CI jobs. | ||
| * Arjan listed the jobs | ||
| * [https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/view/EFTL-Certification-Jobs-11/](https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/view/EFTL-Certification-Jobs-11/) | ||
| * These are not separated by profile. | ||
| * ACTION: Ed to request administrator access to this and child jobs. | ||
| * ACTION: Ed to create necessary work items to make it so we have two independently runnable jobs, based on the above, for Web Profile and Platform Profile. | ||
| * Core Profile | ||
| * Because Core Profile did pass its ballot, Ed suggests releasing the artifacts to Maven central. If changes become necessary, we will do service releases, as usual. | ||
| * For example, WebProfile API maven artifact will publish with version 11.0.0, but could be with a jakartaee-api-parent version of 11.0.1 | ||
| * ACTION: Scott Stark to apply changes from Andrew Pielage in [https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/782\#discussion\_r1872825250](https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/782#discussion_r1872825250) and then we can release the artifacts. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Refactoring progress report | ||
|
|
||
| * [https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/12/views/1](https://github.com/orgs/jakartaee/projects/12/views/1) | ||
|
|
||
| ### Jakarta EE 11 | ||
|
|
||
| * Authentication 3.1.1 TCK update | ||
| * Two new challenges opened with proposed PRs attached | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/authentication/issues/227](https://github.com/jakartaee/authentication/issues/227) | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/authentication/issues/228](https://github.com/jakartaee/authentication/issues/228) | ||
| * Arjan merged the PRs for these issues today and made a new 3.1.1 version today and validated that it worked with glassfish. IBM will validate on Open Liberty and then can promote the TCK | ||
|
|
||
| * Servlet 6.1.1 TCK update | ||
| * [Latest staged version](https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/servlet/jakartaee11/staged/eftl/) is from Oct 31 | ||
| * What is the status of getting a newer staged version with the revert done? | ||
| * ACTION: Ed and Jared to sync offline to understand the job to be done. | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/680](https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/680) was merged in and was bad | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/757](https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/757) reverted the change and disabled the test | ||
| * No new staged TCK created since the revert happened | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| * Validation 3.1 API | ||
| * Hearing that the Validation implementation cannot go final until some files are added / updated in the API jar. | ||
| * When will we get a new 3.1.1 release of the API? | ||
| * ACTION: Jared, please clarify the job to be done. | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/validation/pull/221](https://github.com/jakartaee/validation/pull/221) appears to be the PR that is needed for a 3.1.1 updated API artifact | ||
|
|
||
| ### Jakarta EE 12 | ||
|
|
||
| * DISCUSS proposal to decouple “JDK-update” releases from feature releases in two separate release trains | ||
| * Train 1: Just whatever necessary to pass on JDK x | ||
| * Train 1 would be released e.g. 6 months after “an LTS release of Java SE” | ||
| * Is this just a service release of the currently available TCKs, or does it require a minor release of the specs and TCKs? We have done the former in the past. | ||
| * Train 2: New features | ||
| * Train 2 would be released between the train 1 releases, e.g one year after | ||
| * \[Jan\] Requirement to extract Component Spec related tests from the Platform TCK to the Component Spec itself (except integration tests, that would otherwise create new dependencies besides the API and Spec document itself directly or transitively \- they should stay in the Platform TCK project and/or in the related project). |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ | ||
| # Jakarta EE Platform Call | ||
|
|
||
| Date: 2024-12-17 | ||
| Present: | ||
|
|
||
| * Jan Westerkamp (iJUG) | ||
| * James Perkins (Red Hat) | ||
| * John Clingan (Red Hat) | ||
| * Ed Burns (MSFT) | ||
| * Jared Anderson (IBM) | ||
| * Anand NK (IBM) | ||
| * Nathan Rauh (IBM) | ||
| * Tom Watson (IBM) | ||
| * Ivar Grimstad (Eclipse Foundation) | ||
| * Arjan Tijms (OmniFish) | ||
| * Petr Aubrecht (Payara) | ||
| * Ed Bratt (Oracle) | ||
| * Gurunandan Rao (Oracle) | ||
| * Dmitry Kornilov (Oracle) | ||
| * Emily Jiang (IBM) | ||
| * Bernd Müller (Ostfalia) | ||
|
|
||
| ### Top of mind for Ed, Arjan, Jared | ||
|
|
||
| * **Next call: January 7, 2025** | ||
| * Modify CI jobs for all EE 11 to comply with Spec Committee’s process for TCK jars pushed to Maven Central. | ||
| * Do this before releasing the Core Profile jars to maven central. | ||
| * See official [document from spec committe](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1muzaV5D2p_vP6C-Lu8KFNJ64wA2qNXtaw-SJ1sFgt9I/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.c8t4z8ryjz7y). | ||
| * ACTION: Ed to take this action: push the executables to Maven Central | ||
| * Currently, the zip file has these jar(s) embedded within the published ZIP. Instead, the above process requires these jar(s) to be explicitly published **along side** the zip. | ||
| * This request originated from Roberto Cortez from MicroProfile: [https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg02076.html](https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg02076.html) | ||
| * This enables the: | ||
| * The SHAS to stay the same | ||
| * Preserves the license files | ||
| * Also need to do this for EE 10 (need to understand how we can do such a thing retroactively). | ||
| * Example of the type of failures that we keep running into with the TCK refactoring: | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/issues/1699](https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/issues/1699) | ||
| * Totally unique problem (we haven’t encountered this specific one before after \~6 months) | ||
| * The point of bringing this up: | ||
| * Only related to the tests itself | ||
| * Completely unrelated to GlassFish or any other server being tested | ||
| * Illustrate the continued existence of the emergence of unknown unknowns. Each such emergence can introduce a very wide range of delay. | ||
| * Guru suggested an idea for satisfying the Persistence test requirement: | ||
| * We have the component spec TCK for persistence 3.2 that has been running and passing for six months. | ||
| * Could we combine this with the existing, passing, platform persistence tests, and call that good enough? | ||
| * Ed asked for discussion from the spec committee members who are also in the Platform project call if this idea would still pass the ballot process for the specification committee. | ||
| * Emily asked, but what about the use of Eclipselink, instead of GlassFish? I think you need to run in the container, not standalone. | ||
| * The discussion proceeded to the topic of what is the current state of affairs for the TCK tests “in container” or “Java SE” mode. | ||
| * Tom elicited that this proposal includes the assumption that if you run the tests outside the container, they will also run inside the container which is not a valid assumption. | ||
| * Platform TCK did agree to focus on Web Profile TCK | ||
| * Continue to work on persistence, EJB lite, assembly, signaturetest | ||
| * Separating out the persistence tests that are only in the Platform. | ||
| * This is implemented using JUnit tags. | ||
| * Guru asked for us to define a plan of record for the case when challenges are raised to tests that are both in the Web Profile and Platform. | ||
| * Consider this scenario: | ||
| * Complete the Web Profile | ||
| * During the Platform process, one of these common tests is challenged. | ||
| * What happens to the instance of this test in the Web Profile? This may happen in connection with a technology that is only present in the Platform profile? | ||
| * Proposals | ||
| * make a copy of the test in question | ||
| * Complete the Web Profile TCK first, but do not go to ballot with the Web Profile. | ||
| * TCK refactoring project understaffed. | ||
| * Currently | ||
| * Oracle: 2 staff members full time | ||
| * Red Hat: 1 staff member full time, often 2 | ||
| * IBM: 1 staff member part-time | ||
| * Microsoft: 1 staff member part-time (coordinating) | ||
| * OmniFish: 1 staff member part-time | ||
| * Payara: 0 | ||
| * Tomitribe: 0 | ||
| * Fujitsu: 0 | ||
| * Do any of the members not contributing yet have engineering resources to donate to the effort? | ||
| * Source of truth of what tests are actually running and passing | ||
| * [https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/view/EFTL-Certification-Jobs-11/job/11/job/standalone-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-standalone/](https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/view/EFTL-Certification-Jobs-11/job/11/job/standalone-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-standalone/) | ||
|
|
||
| **![][image1]** | ||
|
|
||
| ### Jakarta EE 11 | ||
|
|
||
| * Authentication 3.1.1 TCK update | ||
| * 3.1.1 is staged and is set to be promoted with [https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/790](https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/790). | ||
|
|
||
| * Servlet 6.1.1 TCK update | ||
| * [Latest staged version](https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/servlet/jakartaee11/staged/eftl/) is from Oct 31 | ||
| * What is the status of getting a newer staged version with the revert done? | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/680](https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/680) was merged in and was bad | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/757](https://github.com/jakartaee/servlet/pull/757) reverted the change and disabled the test | ||
| * No new staged TCK created since the revert happened | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| * Validation 3.1 API | ||
| * Validation implementation cannot go final until some files are added / updated in the API jar. | ||
| * When will we get a new 3.1.1 release of the API? | ||
| * [https://github.com/jakartaee/validation/pull/221](https://github.com/jakartaee/validation/pull/221) appears to be the PR that is needed for a 3.1.1 updated API artifact |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters