www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: Policy for being on a JSR?
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2007 04:06:13 GMT

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



Mime
View raw message