Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Suggested Jakarta EESpecifictaionNaming

[Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Since the JSR is complete, there is no Expert Group and no Spec Lead,
only a Maintenance Lead, so I don't think this applies.

Scott Stark wrote on 4/20/19 7:15 AM:
> If there is no response to an open letter or ECF lead contact, there
> is a procedure to remove an unresponsive spec lead,
> https://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2_11:
> 
> ---
> 3.2.2.4 Unresponsive or inactive Spec Lead
> 
> There may be rare instances when members of the Expert Group feel that
> the Spec Lead is not acting in ways that advance the work of the
> Expert Group and is being unresponsive or inactive. The EG is expected
> to make a reasonable effort to resolve any such issues in a timely
> manner. However, if the situation cannot be resolved these concerns
> should be brought to the attention of the EC as quickly as possible so
> they may be proactively addressed and resolved.
> 
> If the problems cannot be resolved informally, any three members of
> the EG may request the EC to replace the Spec Lead. All such requests
> must clearly state the cause of the concern and provide all necessary
> evidence. If the EC agrees that there is cause, it may ask the PMO to
> replace the Spec Lead. If the Spec Lead is a Member Representative the
> PMO shall ask the Member to replace the Spec Lead. If the Member
> declines to do so the PMO shall seek an alternative Spec Lead, in
> which case the EC must conduct a Transfer Ballot as specified in
> section of this document. If no Spec Lead replacement can be found,
> the EC shall initiate a JSR Renewal Ballot to determine whether the
> JSR should be shut down.
> ---
> 
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 11:35 AM Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Given that IBM, Red Hat, Oracle, Google and Spring Source (now Pivotal) who also Held one of the Spec Lead positions were all in the EG, it should not be too difficult to get such answer? ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Pivotal no longer seems a JCP member, looks like it did not renew its membership, but it is a Solution member of Eclipse Foundation, so it can’t be hard for Eclipse to reach out to someone who has a say there, e.g. Jürgen Höller or others.
>>
>>
>>
>> Werner
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Scott Stark
>> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 19:29
>> To: Jakarta specification committee
>> Subject: Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Suggested Jakarta EESpecifictaionNaming standard
>>
>>
>>
>> I would suggest that the Eclipse Foundation write an open letter to
>>
>> the past spec leads asking for collaboration on moving the IP over to
>>
>> the Jakarta effort.
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
> jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
>