www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: JSR 291 - public review
Date Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:14:42 GMT
On Jan 22, 2007, at 4:59 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

> On Jan 22, 2007, at 7:26 PM, BJ Hargrave wrote:
>> This all seems to be a discussion that is not appropriate at  
>> Public Review
>> time. Final licensing terms are not due under the JCP until Final  
>> Ballot,
>> at which time a discussion in the license terms would be  
>> appropriate. The
>> discussion at PR time should be focussed on the technical merits.
> I personally don't agree, given our status as "shaftee" when it  
> comes to TCK licensing.
> I think that the only way for reasonable chance for remediation of  
> a broken TCK license would be submitting it for review at draft  
> time, and then having the change to modify in time for final ballot.
> That said, it's not fair to place this burden on this JSR right  
> now, ad hoc.  So I'll mention the expectation in the comment.   
> However, going forward, I think I'll start making this expectation  
> clear in JSRs we vote on.


For those of you that are working on this Spec, it would be a big win  
and remove a lot of negativity from this JSR if you could deliver the  
proposed final licensing terms in the next week or two.


View raw message