[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] [eclipse.org-membership-at-large] Proposed EE.next Working Group



you misinterpreted the context of my statement: It is neither about brands nor being unable to implement EE4J, but about the definition given in the proposed WG charter / FAQ why strategic members are so much more important than committer members.





From: ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Millidge (Payara)
Sent: Mittwoch, 7. Februar 2018 23:55
To: EE4J community discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] [eclipse.org-membership-at-large] Proposed EE.next Working Group


Just clarifying what I believe are some incorrect statements here;


âIn your definition, there cannot be Java EE implementations provided by non-paying members, which clearly rules out some existing initiativesâ


First these implementation wonât be Java EE as that brand will not be managed by the Eclipse Foundation. Second the charter doesnât say this it says âReview and approve the trademark policy to ensure compatibility of independent implementations of specificationsâ. My understanding is that all specifications, and TCKs will be open source and therefore you can implement them freely.


Also the FAQ makes it clear that these committees do not set project direction. That is for the committers on the projects themselves and they are elected via the Eclipse Development process https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/development_process.php .





From: ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Markus KARG
Sent: 07 February 2018 20:56
To: 'EE4J community discussions' <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] [eclipse.org-membership-at-large] Proposed EE.next Working Group


You asked for feedback on the proposed charter. I completely dislike the idea of separate membership levels, particularly the fact that industry will per definition have more votes than committers. The motto should be "one man, one vote" and not "one paying vendor, four non-elected seats". The explanation in the FAQ is wrong: "Strategic members are the vendors that deliver Java EE implementations. As such they are typically putting in the largest number of contributors, and are leading many of the projects." First of all, strategic members not necessarily are providing anything; the simply pay a lot of $. In your definition, there cannot be Java EE implementations provided by non-paying members, which clearly rules out some existing initiatives. Looking at some JSRs I need to say that there had been some EGs where more work had been done by individuals than by strategic members. Also, there are Java EE implementations provided by small companies which cannot or do not want to pay thousands of $. What you currently plan is not in the best interest of the Java universe, but in the interest of particularly big industrial vendors only. This is not what I or JUGs want. We want power in the hands of democratically elected people, but not in the hands of the industry. This will make funding harder, but democracy should be worth it. Please change the charter so only elected individuals can serve, serving will be free always, and there will not be any membership levels.





From: eclipse.org-membership-at-large-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse.org-membership-at-large-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: Montag, 5. Februar 2018 20:52
To: eclipse.org-membership-at-large@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse.org-membership-at-large] Proposed EE.next Working Group


Eclipse Foundation Members,

A proposal has been made to establish the EE.next Working Group[1]. EE.next is the proposed Eclipse Foundationâs working group focusing on cultivating the ecosystem interests related to the Java EE-related technologies. In particular, the EE.next working group will manage the specifications process related to EE4J and the technology currently known as Java EE. Members are invited to comment on the draft EE.next charter and participate in forming this working group. See the FAQ[2] for more details.


The proposed charter [1]  for this working group is available for review.  If you have any comments or feedback on the proposed charter, please send to ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx.  All Members of the Eclipse Foundation are invited to join and participate in this working group. Based on the feedback and level of interest, the working group will be officially created in March 2018.

Please feel free to contact myself, or the ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list if you have any questions.

[1] https://www.eclipse.org/org/workinggroups/eclipse_ee_next_charter.php