Bill,

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.

Will

Arjan Tijms wrote on 08/ 2/17 02:05 PM:

As a reminder, the API Javadoc is also an integral part of the spec text.

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.

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 required.

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 version.

See my definition of errata in my JCP Processes writeup.

-- 
Will Hopkins | WebLogic Security Architect | +1.781.442.0310
Oracle Application Development
35 Network Drive, Burlington, MA 01803