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

Sorry, the original header slipped, so confirming also Ivar's assessment

If a commitee had 10 to 12 instead of 24 members, then that's more or less the ratio of the JCP EC ;-)

It seems JUGs with Big Bucks (LJC, SouJava, maybe iJUG) could end up joining as Soltions Members and get a seat or two among those 10, but other than that it won't be more than 2, maybe 3 "Community representatives" as it looks like, so given even the JUGs have to circle a rather big collection box among their members or (corporate) sponsors, Markus' impression seems right.

Werner



On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:30 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
   (Ivar Grimstad)


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

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:30:36 +0000
From: Ivar Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
    selection
Message-ID:
    <CAOAQAPofUJKKuenE+DbdPt+Wj_6BmDE6kADC+15AcvQWRPTykw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:23 PM Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ivar,
>
>
>
> (2) so in sum, when there a 1000 individual commiters they share one vote,
> and when there are 10 companies they have 10 votes, right? That's what I
> call pay-to-play, and it proofs that individuals are not equal in their
> powers.
>

I think you will find that this is how most committees with elected
representatives operate.

Anyway, we will not get any further on this mailing list. If you have a
better voting scheme you want to suggest, I think you will have to put it
on the Jakarta EE WG mailing list.


>
>
> -Markus
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:
> ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org] *On Behalf Of *Ivar Grimstad
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 27. M?rz 2018 19:19
>
>
> *To:* EE4J community discussions
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 6:57 PM Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Ivar,
>
>
>
> thank you for sharing your opinion.
>
>
>
> Regarding (1) this is interesting. So a committer is not a committer in
> the git sense (as what is in git is by definition code), but something
> different. Ok, understood.
>
>
>
> Regarding (2) that would effectively mean that every committer member has
> one vote in these committees, so if we are 1.000 committer members, we have
> 1.000 votes?
>
>
>
> No, the committer members elect a representative. Just as a company elect,
> or appoint, a representative regardless of the size of the company.
>
>
>
>
>
> -Markus
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:
> ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org] *On Behalf Of *Ivar Grimstad
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 27. M?rz 2018 07:36
>
>
> *To:* EE4J community discussions
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> 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
>
> --
>
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j-community/attachments/20180327/7abbc7a4/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 120
**********************************************