www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS} Alternate Proposed Changes to JCP Participation - Round
Date Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:25:24 GMT

Ralph Goers wrote:
> When does a vote on a JSR take place on licensing terms? I suggest you
> re-review http://jcp.org/en/jsr/results?id=4216 and look at the
> comments. Here you have most of the participants abstaining due to
> licensing issues, not on the technical merits of interfaces or
> annotations. From what I can see, all that is being suggested is that
> the ASF continue to do this whenever it is necessary with one change
> being a No vote instead of an abstention.

Ok...again...I think we have our wires crossed.  I am *not* opposed to
abstaining the formulation of the JSR based on licensing issues.  I
think that goes hand in hand with your director analogy and voting on
something based on business as usual.  I *am* opposed to voting -1 when
the JSR has bee established and the votes internally are technical in
nature.  Perhaps I read Matt's write up wrong:

"Finally, JSRs that violate an open environment in terms of licenses
that add downstream restrictions, whether it be the source that
implements the specification or the consequences of testing that imposes
use restrictions, or other restrictions incompatible with the AL 2.0 the
ASF would regrettably vote against such JSRs."

Maybe I read this as all too over reaching regarding the JSR. Vote
against the formulation of the JSR, but once we are on it and it becomes
technical, then I think we are in a different situation, and we are best
to just pull out.  *That* is my point.


> Ralph

View raw message