2023-04-24 - Java 17

Date

Apr 24, 2023

Time	Item	Who	Notes

Time

Item

Who

Notes

1 min

Scribe

All

@Maccabee Levine

*

Java 17 RFC

@Jeremy Huff

Background:

Notes:

Do we need subgroup, or just go on to public review phase?
- @Craig McNally We don't have much of a middle ground between TC discussion vs. RFC, except AD. Should capture decision in the log. Do we have to loop in others?
- @Jeremy Huff How would we apply to existing modules?
- @Maccabee Levine Let's just to the RFC process "swiftly". Get to public review immediately.
- @Craig McNally Useful exercise to see how that works?
- @Jeremy Huff We already had lazy consensus on Preliminary Review on Wednesday. Public Review does need time for input.
- @Craig McNally We've rarely/never? done the "Post Review" process of helping us improve the process.
- @Jeremy Huff Grace period needed? Subgroup maybe needed to hammer out those details. Better for culture of project.
  - @Julian Ladisch Backend modules are separate, so individual modules could still work as J11. Teams can share any difficulties during Public Review.
  - @Craig McNally Give it maybe a week?
  - Consensus yes, one week. Keep to our own deadline.
@Jeremy Huff will lead subgroup and get it wrapped up quickly. @Julian Ladisch and @Craig McNally participating.
- Team will add comments to the PR. @Jeremy Huff will also set up a chat.
Deliverables:
- Work with the submitter of the Java 17 RFC to refine and provide feedback.