It is not that well known, but Oracle actually wields sole veto power in the EC. As you also know, as holder of most of the JCP IP, Oracle can basically ignore whatever the EC says. At best, the EC can stop JCP progress, but that's hardly productive or in any ones interest.
I've always wished the EC well. It was setup with the right intentions and has well meaning folks like yourself on it. The practical reality from an Oracle management perspective is sadly very different from what it should be. Indeed many companies in the EC Oracle management views with deep seated suspicion.
-------- Original message --------
From: Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/9/17 12:29 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] EE4J and the JCP
I don't think there are so many alternatives.
Eclipse never was and never intends to standardize things itself.
There are always actual standard bodies like OASIS, OGC, OSGi and others defining standards which projects build upon.
There are not too many such organizations that would suit the needs of the Java or other languages and platforms.
Sun discussed with a few like ISO, but I know best, almost all of them are extremely slow-moving.
Take W3C and efforts like HTML5, it took decades. The update to JSR 363 is fueled by changes to the Metric System and SI Standard (inter-related to various ISO standards). The first major change to that standard since 1960!!!
Then there are other players like NetFlix who just don't care about standardization. I spoke to one of their speakers at the JCP Party and they said like Inspector Morse "We don't join things". Meaning, like Facebook or several others they do most things in the open, but they have no interest to standardize them nor to join either Eclipse or Apache Foundation or the JCP.
> I agree with Kevin's assessment on this. Efficiency is also just one issue
> at the JCP. The bigger issue is direct and indirect Oracle control,
> especially at the EC level. While these are solvable problems, the question
> we should ask is whether it is worth solving instead of using avenues that
> are already far more vendor neutral.
What could be more vendor neutral than the JCP EC?
Oracle has no way of overruling things in the EC.
Jigsaw was nearly stopped by the EC. The issues that got many of us vote against it came by members of the community. And were ultimately heard. If this was Microsoft, Facebook or even Google in their own projects like .NET, OpenGraph, Android, etc. they merely listen to a few large partners and vendors maybe but you would not see their projects take the community that much into consideration.
The only JSR that failed a Renewal Ballot was also led by Oracle. That one also got delayed by other duties the Spec Lead was drawn into (e.g. stuff like Project FN;-) so the EC killed it and Oracle could only vote against that with a single vote like everyone else.
As for "a new JCP.next" that's already happening. Especially when it comes to new JSRs that differ very little from the previous ones (e.g. the Java SE Umbrellas) there shall be an easier way to file them based on existing information.
Werner