Use Advanced Search to search the entire archive.
[jsr363-experts] Re: Would like a delay for the early draft
- From: Werner Keil <
>
- To: "
" <
>
- Subject: [jsr363-experts] Re: Would like a delay for the early draft
- Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 15:10:25 +0100
Hi,
Thanks, Jean-Marie for the update. Please expecially yourself and Leonardo
(by himself or with the help of V2COM legal;-) have a look at the license
text both inside the spec and recent ("head") Git repo of unit-api.
The official date is today (Dec 14) but a bit of last minute brushing of
the Spec document is of course possible. I'll aim for sending it to PMO
Wednesday afternoon, so thanks to time difference they'll have it in the
course of Wednesday, too.
The PMO is closed all week from the 22nd till the 26th. So it will likely
not be seen on jcp.org before say New Year or the week from January 5. That
would do before the F2F;-)
Cheers,
Werner
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jean-Marie Dautelle
<
>
wrote:
>
>
Hi All,
>
Waiting until Wednesday is fine with me.
>
Cheers,
>
JM
>
>
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Werner Keil
>
<
>
>
wrote:
>
>
>
> We are preparing EDR not PDR;-)
>
>
>
> The duration is not so much an issue, we may ask for a longer time if you
>
> think that makes sense to others who review it.
>
>
>
> Keep in mind, this is an Early Draft, the readme already contains a
>
> disclaimer that RI JavaDoc may be missing certain content or methods can
>
> change.
>
>
>
> If we do not file it to PMO early next week we certainly won't see the
>
> EDR filed before the EC F2F which would be highly beneficial when
>
> presenting it.
>
>
>
> Other Spec Leads, WDYT?
>
>
>
> Werner
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Martin Desruisseaux <
>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>
>> Hello all
>
>>
>
>> Would it be possible to have a delay before publishing the early draft,
>
>> for example until Wednesday? The specification has inconsistencies with
>
>> the
>
>> actual API and RI - I found a few of them and I'm only at 1/3 of the spec.
>
>> I also think that the API javadoc is incomplete. For example:
>
>>
>
>> - Unit.getName() saying nothing about localization. We could force
>
>> the "metre" spelling instead of "meter" or leave that choice to
>
>> implementations. But no matter which contract we choose, I think that
>
>> it
>
>> should be in the javadoc if we want to get comments on that.
>
>> - Dimension javadoc saying something about unit compatibility which
>
>> I'm not sure is sufficient. For example the documentation said nothing
>
>> about Joule versus Torque, which would be compatibles units according
>
>> that
>
>> javadoc.
>
>>
>
>> I would also like a public review period longer than 30 days...
>
>>
>
>> Martin
>
>>
>
>>
>
>
--
>
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most
>
intelligent. It is the one that is most adaptable to change. - Darwin's
>
Origin of Species (digest)
>