 
Use of JCP site is subject to the
JCP Terms of Use and the
Oracle Privacy Policy
 |
|
Executive Committee Meeting Minutes |
Tuesday, December 8, 2020 |
PMO |
|
Executive Committee |
Total Attendance: 17 of 18 voting members
|
Since 75% of the EC's voting members were present, the EC was quorate for this session. |
The EC Standing Rules state the following penalties for non-attendance at EC meetings (note that those who participate in face-to-face meetings by phone are officially counted as absent):
Missing two meetings in a row results in a loss of voting privileges until two consecutive meetings have been attended.
Missing five meetings in a row, or missing two-thirds of the meetings in any consecutive 12-month period results in loss of the EC seat.
There are no changes in voting privileges as a result of this meeting.
Gireesh Punathil is an additional alternate for IBM.
Heather presented the usual EC stats (see the presentation for details). Amelia asked why we were not discussing BNY Mellon's question regarding JSR 391 on the EC mailing list. Heather explained that the JCP process document requires JSR discussion to happen transparently via public discussion, and she directed his comments to be discussed in the core-libs-dev list. This increase in transparency for Expert Groups was put into effect by the JCP EC ten years ago via JSR 348, JCP v. 2.8. We will further discuss how the JCP and the Java developer community can contribute in the next agenda item led by Java SE platform Spec Lead, Iris Clark.
Iris presented an overview of the Java SE Platform JSR development updates for JSR 391 and JSR 392 (see the presentation for details). Don Raab asked about his comments sent to the list regarding adding new methods to releases and also mentioned backwards compatibility in relation to some projects participating in the Quality Outreach program. Iris directed him to the CSRs and stated she would send the CSR dashboard to the EC (it is also linked on the JSR Project Page listed on the JCP.org JSR details page). She also suggested contacting projects leads from the Quality Outreach group if you find a potential issue. Testing the provided Early Access builds is encouraged to help uncover potential issues. Comments should be sent to the appropriate mailing list - whether that is the JSR comments list or another list. Tim pointed out that the discussion on the JSR comments list is focused on the specification. Heather stated that she can help direct EC Members to the best location if you are uncertain for direction/advice on the best place to have the discussion. Amelia asked how deprecated features are managed; Iris explained that they do not disappear overnight, deprecated features are listed in the JDK release page and are typically accompanied by alternate recommendations and actually removed in the next release after being listed for deprecation and warning messages are issued to allow developers time to plan for alternatives. The Deprecated API lists all deprecations for the release. Those in the "For Removal" table are eligible for removal in a future release. The 391 Spec also contains this info including the release when the forRemoval annotation was added.
Heather reviewed the summary of discussions in the Java in Education. We reviewed that EC Members can use a new social media template to promote the importance and need for Java developers, and to spread the word about Java in Education for JUG leaders. The materials from the February meetings with JUG leaders are published on the JCP.org multimedia site and the newly updated GitHub wiki.
Heather reviewed the remaining dates for the 2021 calendar. We will plan to meet virtual through 2021. We adjourned the meeting.
