www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <jgenen...@savoirtech.com>
Subject Re: Are proprietary TCK's compatible with open standards?
Date Wed, 04 Jul 2007 23:51:27 GMT
I am fine with all but the "voted down" part.  Let's just not  
participate in those.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 4, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@apache.org> wrote:

> We need to find a way forward, a way that breaks the JCP loose from  
> the "corrupting"[1] influences that so evidently drive it today.  So  
> in the spirit of brainstorming, I'm forwarding on to this mailing  
> list a notion expressed by Dalibor Topic[2]:
>    "Proprietary software should not be allowed to be tied in as a
>    fundamental part of an open standard in any form."
>    "It doesn't matter if such software comes from IBM, Sun, Oracle,
>    BEA, Red Hat, Google, Nokia, or someone else. It doesn't really
>    matter what the restrictions are, either."
>    "If the TCK is proprietary, a JSR needs to be voted down, until it
>    is resubmitted with that bug fixed."
> My initial thoughts: is this step necessary?  No, not if there are  
> viable other alternatives.  Is this sufficient?  Actually, yes.  It  
> would neatly solve both the FOU and NDA issues.  It has the added  
> benefit of addressing the behavior as opposed to the person.
> So, given that pretty much every idea is being shot down, I for one  
> could support a policy built around such this notion.
> What do others think?
> - Sam Ruby
> [1] I'm using the word "corrupt" in precisely the sense that Larry  
> Lessig used it here:
> http://lessig.org/blog/2007/06/required_reading_the_next_10_y.html
> [2] http://blog.buni.org/blog/acoliver/2007/07/03/The-Apache-Conundrum#response-4

View raw message