Create tck_challenge.md #217
Conversation
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
|
@Emily-Jiang it looks good to me and I though I could likely be able to review it without the following request, in case it's available I would ask if this format is a template/document from someplace we can reference as a motivating factor for the introduction of, please? |
Not sure whether you can view this. This request is from Jakarta EE specification committee. |
| assignees: '' | ||
|
|
||
| --- | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should prompt people to review https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/tckprocess/ as part of the process.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't quite understand what you meant. It is not my aim to prompt people to review the process. If you want to achieve that, please feel free to propose a PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If someone came here to raise a challenge, they might have visited the tck process.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is important that the challenge is filed by an appropriate person: https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/tckprocess/#_who_can_file_a_challenge - is there someway that during raising the challenge information can be provided so it can be verified an implementor is raising the issue?
I think you should also provide space for the other parts of the requirements when filing a challenge:
https://jakarta.ee/committees/specification/tckprocess/#_filing_a_challenge. I think most of this fits nicely in your format but perhaps the following should have their own sections?:
- The relevant specification version and section number(s)
- The implementation being tested, including name and company (maybe this is the first part of this comment?)
|
Do you know how GitHub behaves if only one one template exists in the repo? In other words, do you know if someone would be able to raise an issue on this project but not using the new template (after this pull request is merged)? |
No description provided.