Scott M Stark

From still unpublished spec committee meeting minutes of Apr 19, May 5, there was a general agreement that backwards incompatible changes are to be allowed, the current Java EE legacy...

Out of scope for EE10

For EE11 we do not have Config, so the process would simply be to deprecate now in preparation for replacement in a future release. @edburns from the https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/versioning/ process, we...

It does not need to be done in EE 12, that would simply be the first time it could be removed if deprecated in EE 11. The other issue is...

Here is a proposal for 5 different versioning schemes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZQGEYSCN5eYtDjWOXAQqNin7iwLKHnQFEP73FDoQdbw/edit?usp=sharing I believe it is a given that there will be a core profile before the next web and platform specifications...

Red Hat will oppose this for at least two reasons. 1. we don't have users asking for this. To be part of a platform or profile there needs to be...

Based on the discussions around the requirements for JPMS in EE10, the main critique to requirements regarding JMPS was that runtimes and alternative sources of API jars wanted the ability...

Apparently this script is just completely out of date with even the listed dependency as the discoclient-2.0.39.jar does not have the classes used in the getjava script, e.g., `io.foojay.api.discoclient.pkg.Architecture`: ```...

The current platform-tck release is expecting a jakarta.tck groupId: ```xml install-pages-platform-tck package install-file jakarta.tck pages-platform-tck ${project.version} jar pages-platform-tck-${project.version}.jar false ``` We will also need a release of the tck staged...

The current main must be missing some updates as I had to make a few changes just to get to the point of seeing the naming exception. I has pushed...