Use Advanced Search to search the entire archive.
[jsr363-experts] Re: Specification not ready for a release today
- From: Werner Keil <
>
- To: "
" <
>
- Subject: [jsr363-experts] Re: Specification not ready for a release today
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:51:49 +0100
That would be an option, but 311 refers to a transparent mailing list. Not
sure, if we could refer to anything outside what's visible via java.net
Google Groups or similar?
We could ask during the F2F and add something like it later where
appropriate.
For now, I'll send the necessary material tonight.
Whether the next stage was to be PD or another ED, we can figure out. The
main difference is PD is voted on, but EDR also encourages feedback from
every interested party, so we'd see what the Google Groups or other
channels (or F2F meetings plus occasional Hackathons.
A few phrases like "non-standard API" are wrong, as there is just one API,
so I'll change that to "...Reference Implentation" or where it was a
separate headline call it appropriately, something like "other RI elements".
Regards,
Werner
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Leonardo Lima
<
>
wrote:
>
>
Martin,
>
>
We'll surely ask how can acknowledgement be provided in this document.
>
I'll consult the PMO asking how this can be achieved. I believe that an
>
acknowledgement
>
right before the Introduction, after the general terms, can be added
>
without harm to anybody (and benefit to who deserves :). Something along
>
the lines of
>
https://jsr311.java.net/nonav/releases/1.1/spec/spec3.html#x3-90001.7,
>
saying that we received input from JSR275 and you and Otavio, by name and
>
company (as per JSPA signage).
>
>
Would that be ok to you?
>
>
Regards,
>
Leonardo.
>
>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Martin Desruisseaux <
>
>
>
wrote:
>
>
>
> I stop for now (it is 3:20 AM on my side). Still have lot of open
>
> issues, but hopefully should now be closer to the current API, have less
>
> invalid statements, and more formatting.
>
>
>
> Still, given the large amount of work by non-spec leaders (including
>
> work inherited from JSR-275), would be nice if some sort of
>
> acknowledgement were written somewhere in the document. I guess that in
>
> other JSR the spec leader usually act as editors. In this case the
>
> editor work has been largely done by non-spec leaders.
>
>
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>