[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo selection

Hi,

It's a little hard to say, becauseÂhttps://science.eclipse.org/members shows some member companies of the Steering Committee (those with a voice/vote in the Science WG) whileÂhttps://science.eclipse.org/steeringcommittee shows a few others, but except for Serban (with no information available) or Matthew, who I know, has been with the Science WG since day one (Halliburton is not listed in the Science, so he might be an Individual), everyone else represents a company that is at least a Solutions Member.

Science is currently much smaller with just a single committee, so hopefully there could be a few community representatives (the JCP has 4 in the EC, 3 of them elected)

Werner



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:19 PM, <ee4j-community-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Send ee4j-community mailing list submissions to
    ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    ee4j-community-owner@eclipse.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ee4j-community digest..."


Today's Topics:

 Â1. Re: Community Control was Jakarta EE logo selection
   (Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:19:38 +0000
From: Guillermo Gonz?lez de Ag?ero   <z06.guillermo@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
    selection
Message-ID:
    <CAG1ZpUZTeO5U+PTteX=s3RvZVccecB=oRWTFsOWNkEAJA+8VAA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

El mar., 27 mar. 2018 7:35, Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxx>
escribi?:

> Hi Markus,
>
> 1. I don't think that there is stated anywhere that a committer must
> commit code. I don't even think you need to have any github commits logged.
> The project itself suggest and vote for including a committer. Any form of
> contribution could be used as basis.
>
> 2. The composition of the committees has not been set yet as far as I
> know. I would think that a paying member company will have one seat (one
> vote) in each committee. Committer members will have AT LEAST one seat (one
> vote) in each committee. So, yes committer members will have at least the
> same number of seats as a paying member company.
>
I hope the community gets more seats. Each company represents a different
set of interests. But the community comprises a lot of mixed interests,
which can't be represented by just one person.

Probably a vendor/community ratio (5 vendors/1 individual) would work best
so community representation doesn't vanish as more companies participate on
Jakarta EE.

>
> The PMC does not have a list of members as far as I know.
>
> Ivar
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:55 PM Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> Ivar,
>>
>>
>>
>> you misunderstood me.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Individual contributors CANNOT become members FOR FREE. Only
>> COMMITTERs can become members FOR FREE. Not every contributor is a
>> committer, even if his input is very valueable for both, the projects and
>> the EF as a whole. Only CODE-contributors can become commiters, but input
>> is not always code. If I wouldn't be a JAX-RS committer, I wouldn't have a
>> vote without payment, independent of my knowledge and history in Java EE.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. AFAIK all commiters will share ONE seat, but I might be wrong here.
>> Will the committers really have the same amount of seats as the paying
>> vendors?
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, I am already a committer member. Seems the PMC has no list of these?
>>
>>
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:
>> ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org] *On Behalf Of *Ivar Grimstad
>> *Sent:* Montag, 26. M?rz 2018 21:26
>>
>>
>> *To:* EE4J community discussions
>> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
>> selection
>>
>>
>>
>> Markus,
>>
>>
>>
>> I think you are wrong on a couple of points here.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Individual contributors CAN become members. I, for example is an
>> individual contributor and a Committer Member and it does not cost me a
>> penny.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. As a Committer member, I can run for election for the Steering-,
>> Specification- and Marketing Committees of the Jakarta EE working group.
>> Still without paying. And with the same rights as the paying Influencer-
>> and Participant member companies. They also have to be elected.
>>
>>
>>
>> So, I encourage you to become a committer member (two docs to sign). It
>> does not cost you anything other than the time you're already spending.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ivar
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:25 PM Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>>
>>
>> you miss the point that individual contributos cannot become members, and
>> that committer members do not have the same powers than paying members
>> have. So what you actually express is simply a commitment to the
>> pay-to-play rules of the EF, which is exactly what I dislike most with the
>> EF. For me, the powers in the EF should get discoupled from the payments.
>> In fact I am willing to donate money to the EF, but I am not willing to
>> spend thousands of dollars just to gain the same rights.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:
>> ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org] *On Behalf Of *Steve Millidge
>> (Payara)
>> *Sent:* Montag, 26. M?rz 2018 12:40
>> *To:* EE4J community discussions
>> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
>> selection
>>
>>
>>
>> ?The Community? is a broad constituency and I don?t think any of us would
>> claim to speak for the whole of the community.
>>
>>
>>
>> Saying that I feel I have to speak up for the Eclipse Foundation here.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Eclipse Foundation is a small approx. $6M annual budget
>> https://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/reports/annual_report.php , not
>> for profit, member supported organisation. There are many classes of
>> membership open to both corporations, not for profits; vendors; end-users
>> and individuals. The smallest fees for small companies is $1,500 per year
>> to be a Solutions Member and $25,000 to be a Strategic Member with the same
>> rights and representation as larger members. While these fees are not
>> likely affordable for an individual, individual committers are still
>> represented on the board and on the committees of the working group through
>> committer elections. The Foundation?s governance is open
>> https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/ and ran by members in accordance
>> with its constitution. The membership fees drive the work of the Foundation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Therefore if members of the community wish to make the rules and have
>> control over the Eclipse Foundation and over JakartaEE the community is
>> free to join the Eclipse Foundation, the JakartaEE WG and/or contribute to
>> EE4J projects. I would encourage all out there that care passionately about
>> Jakarta EE to get involved individually if you can. Alternatively if your
>> employer is heavily dependent on JakartaEE technologies and wants control
>> or influence over the Eclipse Foundation ask them to become members and
>> participate.
>>
>>
>>
>> Saying all that EE4J projects are governed by the Eclipse Development
>> Process
>> https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/development_process.php
>> through open source rules of engagement and there are no fees to join the
>> individual projects, contribute, become a committer and drive the overall
>> technical direction through contributions.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <
>> ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org> *On Behalf Of *Markus KARG
>> *Sent:* 24 March 2018 07:24
>> *To:* 'EE4J community discussions' <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
>> steps
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike,
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks for clarification.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we all would be happy if simply you could confirm that the
>> marketing team did not do any kind of "preselection" by other criteria than
>> just *legal* issues. In particular, they did not rule out logos due to
>> personal taste, style, or design choice. Right?
>>
>>
>>
>> What the community expects is to have control over Jakarta EE (in the
>> sense of making the rules for the EF, not the EF making the rules for the
>> community). This includes that the EF asks the community *before* the EF
>> acts. And with "community" I do not mean "only paying vendors" but also the
>> majority of committers (even non-member committers).
>>
>>
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [
>> mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org
>> <ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mike Milinkovich
>> *Sent:* Freitag, 23. M?rz 2018 22:31
>> *To:* ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
>> steps
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2018-03-23 4:27 PM, Jason Greene wrote:
>>
>> I read that differently. My interpretation is: They just eliminated
>> candidates that failed to meet the design criteria, which did include a
>> basic legal component. The next step is a more thorough legal analysis as
>> well as a brand review from the foundation?s marketing team. From that
>> process they will pick the strongest contenders. Both of these functions
>> are pretty standard (Also really important for major industry marks) and
>> based on expertise & analysis, and while we all have some biases, I
>> seriously doubt this is driven by simple personal preferences.
>>
>>
>> This is correct. We removed the ones that did not meet the design
>> criteria as stated in writing. This included removing the ones that we knew
>> had legal issues. Now we are going to do more reviews, including deeper
>> legal ones.
>>
>> The community will have an opportunity to select from a number of
>> options.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the concern more that there will be too few options and you guys might
>> not like the options, or is it that there is some nefarious purpose? If
>> it?s the latter what would they have to gain?
>>
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2018, at 2:21 PM, Richard Monson-Haefel <rmonson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Right. Some were removed for legal reasons but the rest was a subjective
>> decision by the marketing team.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I understood the original mail in a way that from all submissions the EF
>> removed everything but left over only four due to a pre-selection by their
>> *marketing* team (not *legal* team).
>>
>> -Markus
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org
>> [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Heiko W. Rupp
>> Sent: Freitag, 23. M?rz 2018 20:07
>> To: EE4J community discussions
>> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
>> steps
>>
>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 18:35, Markus KARG wrote:
>>
>> > I second that. The EF should simply remove those logos which are
>> > legally problematic, and then let the community vote for their
>> > favorite. This is a community project, and
>>
>> Isn't that what
>> | > *Â ÂWe will hold a community vote to determine which of these
>> | > final candidate logos should be the chosen logo.
>>
>> says?
>>
>> I understand Paul that the EF needs to (to quote you) "remove those logos
>> which are legally problematic", which is done by the marketing team, as
>> they
>> know this process of removal best.
>>
>> But then I may be wrong.
>>Â Â Heiko
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ee4j-community mailing list
>> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community
>>
>> --
>>
>> Java Champion, JCP EC/EG Member, EE4J PMC, JUG Leader
>> _______________________________________________
>> ee4j-community mailing list
>> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community
>>
> --
>
> Java Champion, JCP EC/EG Member, EE4J PMC, JUG Leader
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j-community/attachments/20180327/b29debdd/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ee4j-community mailing list
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community


End of ee4j-community Digest, Vol 7, Issue 111
**********************************************