You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jcp-open@apache.org by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> on 2007/08/08 01:23:30 UTC
Re: Policy for being on a JSR?
On Jul 30, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> I meant to ask this because it applies for Java EE, as well as the
> ones today.
>
> What's the consensus? I can probably argue this one either way.
It would seem prudent to me to wait until the JSR is complete and on
an individual basis determine if the Spec, TCK and other license
issues are acceptable. The right way to solve this would seem to be
to get the JCP to fix the T's and C's on a spec first.
I thought the reason we voted no was that the terms weren't clearly
spelled out. I personally don't think we should vote down every spec
where the lead is from Sun but should if the terms are
inappropriate. Seems like we can be getting ourselves in the
position of people accepting us voting no and possibly implementing
the spec later if things are cool which diminishes the power of our
vote.
I'm glad Geronimo was able to achieve Java EE 5.0 certification
because I think 6.0 is going to not be as easy.
Re: Policy for being on a JSR?
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Aug 7, 2007, at 9:06 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>
>>
>> It would seem prudent to me to wait until the JSR is complete and
>> on an individual basis determine if the Spec, TCK and other
>> license issues are acceptable. The right way to solve this would
>> seem to be to get the JCP to fix the T's and C's on a spec first.
>>
The above was more of my point. Is there any effort actively engaged
(apart from the no votes) to have T's & C's spelled out clearly
before the vote? Perhaps this is already the policy but having waded
through so many e-mails I'm afraid I've lost track.
>
>> Seems like we can be getting ourselves in the position of people
>> accepting us voting no and possibly implementing the spec later if
>> things are cool which diminishes the power of our vote.
>
> Could be. Clearly this is overstating it, but the only thing
> required for evil to prevail is for good men and women to do
> nothing. I think Java is too important to let Sun get away with
> this. Ask a friendly neighborhood EC member what they are doing. :)
>
I'm not sure how this is overstating it. If the EC doesn't take some
action then this will be the case I spect.
Whatever happened to the good 'ol days when a bunch of angry
villagers could grab torches, clubs and pitchforks and head straight
to Dr. Frankenstein's pad?
Re: Policy for being on a JSR?
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com>.
On Aug 7, 2007, at 7:23 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> On Jul 30, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> I meant to ask this because it applies for Java EE, as well as the
>> ones today.
>>
>> What's the consensus? I can probably argue this one either way.
>
> It would seem prudent to me to wait until the JSR is complete and
> on an individual basis determine if the Spec, TCK and other license
> issues are acceptable. The right way to solve this would seem to
> be to get the JCP to fix the T's and C's on a spec first.
>
> I thought the reason we voted no was that the terms weren't clearly
> spelled out.
No - we vote no when Sun is the spec lead, because it's our POV that
any signatory of the JSPA that isn't living up to the obligations of
the JSPA shouldn't be able to do things like start new JSRs until
their non-compliance is resolved.
> I personally don't think we should vote down every spec where the
> lead is from Sun but should if the terms are inappropriate.
Uh huh. :) We will vote against any spec where Sun is the spec lead
until Sun fixes the non-compliance problem. Friends don't let
friends violate JSPAs.
> Seems like we can be getting ourselves in the position of people
> accepting us voting no and possibly implementing the spec later if
> things are cool which diminishes the power of our vote.
Could be. Clearly this is overstating it, but the only thing
required for evil to prevail is for good men and women to do
nothing. I think Java is too important to let Sun get away with
this. Ask a friendly neighborhood EC member what they are doing. :)
>
> I'm glad Geronimo was able to achieve Java EE 5.0 certification
> because I think 6.0 is going to not be as easy.
One never can tell.
geir