So the category of "trivial" changes you describe corresponds to the
description of errata in your JCP Processes writeup?
That being the case, what JCP process applies to errata? I didn't
see a reference to it on the process or spec lead pages (though I
didn't do a deep dive). Is errata something I can just do? Does it
get vetted or approved somehow? How do I document it (i.e., with a
change list or something)?
Lastly, would acknowledgements fall into the category of errata? I'd
like to acknowledge Alex Kosowski's role as spec lead getting the
JSR off the ground.
On 08/04/2017 04:26 PM, Bill Shannon
Arjan Tijms wrote on 08/ 2/17 02:05
As a reminder,
the API Javadoc is also an integral part of the spec text.
As Will explained, the materials submitted to the JCP aren't
exactly the final versions since at least things like the license
and the version number will change, and we have to allow for the
possibility that the vote will fail and larger changes will be
In particular this means that after the submission this is
totally frozen too and not even things like typos, formatting or
even line endings can be changed anymore.
We use our best engineering judgment when deciding whether to fix
other "trivial" bugs such as typos, formatting, or line endings.
That said, many of the comments in this thread go beyond trivial
obvious fixes, and would require at least a JCP errata MR to
update the document without changing the spec requirements or
See my definition of errata in my JCP
Will Hopkins | WebLogic Security Architect | +1.781.442.0310
Oracle Application Development
35 Network Drive, Burlington, MA 01803