Boris,
I got a similar note from Bob Lee J
After much discussion at the Board about getting
involved in Specification Organizations the agreed policy is that we (the
EMO) will vote in the manner we (the EMO) think best helps Eclipse.
It would be great to hear the opinion of others on how we should
vote. Having the advice of the Architecture Council would be very helpful data
point, I am sure. But in the end Wayne and I are going to make the final
decision.
From: Boris Bokowski [mailto:Boris_Bokowski@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: May-27-09 12:56 PM
To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx;
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: JSRs
Mike, Architecture Council,
The Eclipse Foundation is a member of the JCP SE/EE Executive Committee, which
"is responsible for approving the passage of specifications through key points
of the JCP" (http://jcp.org/en/participation/committee).
Mike, you are the Eclipse Foundation's representative on that committee. On
what basis do you make voting decisions? Would it make sense to involve the AC
on this in some way?
The concrete background of this is that I have been asked by Bob Lee, one of
the proposed spec leads for JSR-330 "Dependency Injection for Java",
that the Eclipse Foundation vote "yes" on this JSR which is up for
"JSR review", i.e. whether it gets approval for development in the
JCP. Personally, I think that the proposal looks good, and that it would be in
Eclipse's interest to support the JSR, but it doesn't feel right that I just
send an email to you without involving others from the Eclipse community.
Questions? Comments?
Boris
