incubator-kato-spec mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "serguei.spitsyn@oracle.com" <serguei.spit...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: Kato status (Was: Actively retiring projects)
Date Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:49:42 GMT
Hi Steve,

It looks like I've mistakenly sent my email to the wrong mailing list:
   kato-spec-subscribe@incubator.apache.org

Please, see my original email attached below.

Sorry for that. :(
I'll re-post it to the correct mailing list.

Thanks,
Serguei

Hi Kato experts,

Steve and Stuart asked me to share the Oracle's position on the JSR-326 
with the Kato members.


I'll try to summarize the key points expressed in the Oracle internal 
discussion.

- While the API looks like a good idea, the priority is not high for Oracle.
   Oracle has no community input indicating that this is widely
   requested or should be prioritized.
   The primary use case is probably in support scenarios in Oracle, IBM, 
etc.

- The target audience is very limited.
    The number of developers or end users that could make use of the API 
is small.
    It is unlikely this API is useful for general Java developers.

- Our resources are limited, and there are bigger items on our plate for 
JDK 8.
   If it can be made into something we think would be valuable for Java 
developers,
   at a level that justifies putting resources on it, then we should 
consider it.
   But it does not sound like it as presently proposed.

It would make sense to collect more feedback from the community and 
customers
to find a good approach. It does not look that it can be done in the JDK 
8 time frame.

Please, ask questions and share any points that could convince Oracle 
management to change this position.

Thanks,
Serguei

On 1/26/12 8:53 AM, Steve Poole wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Apache Kato was initially created  to develop the specification and
> reference implementation for JSR 326.   That is by definition a
> cross-industry activity.   To complete the JSR and create an industry
> standard API we need  a community which has  participants on both sides of
> the API:  those who would use the API to access data  and those  who would
> provide the data to be read.  Without a  broad  consumer/provider community
> we are not going to be able to complete the JSR any time soon.
>
> The rebooting of the OpenJDK community and new  input from Oracle on their
> situation  leads me to suggest a new direction for Kato at this time.
>
>   I hope that  Oracle will post their own statement  but I think it's fair
> for me to say that, at this point,   they have other business concerns that
> are more pressing than helping us out right now.   That may change later.
> The good news is that with the OpenJDK reboot  we  have a real opportunity
> to address some of our technical challenges  directly without requiring
> Oracles assistance.   I'm already an active participant in OpenJDK and I do
> intend to scratch a few itches over time that way.
>
> Given all that I'd like to propose the following simple plan to revitalise
> Apache Kato
>
> 1 - We ignore or put on hold  the JSR work. With limited involvement from
> Oracle at the moment  we have to assume that its not going to complete
> anytime soon and maybe never.
> 2 - We refocus Kato towards  post-mortem diagnostics tools.  We already
> have a good set of tools and I'd like to improve them and add more.  For
> instance  I have some ideas for a Java serialization diagnostics tool that
> would fit well here.
> 3 - Where we find a need for new data from the JVM we (as individuals) work
> with the  OpenJDK community to make that happen.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Stuart Monteith<stukato@stoo.me.uk>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>         I'm cross posting this between kato-dev and kato-spec as it is
>> important to both the Kato incubator and JSR-326. It is a discussion on the
>> general incubator mailing list.
>>
>> There is also a discussion, initiated by Robert, about parking the Kato
>> incubator "[VOTE] Park Kato". There have also been discussions on the
>> reporting for Kato.
>>
>> Either way, please read. A decision will have to be made soon about what
>> to do about Kato. I'd rather we decide rather than having that decision
>> made for us.
>>
>> Regards,
>>    Stuart
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Kato status (Was: Actively retiring projects)
>> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:13:23 +0000
>> From: Robert Burrell Donkin<robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com**>
>> Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Jukka Zitting<jukka.zitting@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There seems to be some people assuming that the IPMC wants to
>>> terminate the Kato podling. Looking back I wonder if my original
>>> status review was the source of this:
>>>
>> :-)
>>
>>   On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Jukka Zitting<jukka.zitting@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Sam Ruby<rubys@intertwingly.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 2008-11-06 Kato
>>>>>
>>>> S: Zero activity.
>>>> R: Terminate.
>>>>
>>> This was based on looking at commit and kato-dev@ list activity, both
>>> zero or very low for an extended amount of time. There was no recent
>>> status report.
>>>
>> AFAICT Soon after entry, the standards process stalled. This stopped
>> active development. Most of the activity after then has been the
>> community trying to find a way around the standards issue, with little
>> success. Progress depends on Oracle coming to a decision (one way or
>> the other) about the future of the standard. This might happen today,
>> tomorrow or in ten years time.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.**apache.org<general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.**org<general-help@incubator.apache.org>
>>
>>
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message