To my eye, the whole #4 bullet feels out of place, worded incorrectly (it says 30 days notice, but doesn't actually talk about the duration of an actual ballot), and too tightly coupled with a specific communication channels.
Independent of that, do we believe that thirty days is required? As was mentioned in a separate thread, we're talking about a ballot of the same people who actually author the document. That seems excessive and unnecessary. One week seems like plenty of time.
Proposal #1: we strike out bullet #4 and add bullet #2f with this text: "JESP Update: 7 calendar days"
Additionally, the Steering Committee has no formal role in either process itself or the adoption of the process. I'm thinking that we can implicate them indirectly in a manner similar to how we do profile designations.
Proposal #2: change bullet #1 to: "Any modification to or revision of this Jakarta EE Specification Process, including the adoption of a new version of the EFSP, must be approved by a Super-majority of the Specification Committee, including a Super-majority of Strategic Members of the Jakarta EE Working Group, in addition to any other ballot requirements set forth in the EFSP.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Wayne
