Re: [ee4j-community] Process Question

[Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ryan,

From the same blog post that you have referenced:

We are months away from even starting to define the specification process that will be used in the future. However, when we do I expect that this new process will create a new certification mark which can be properly considered the new “Java EE” name. We will be engaging with the community in the selection of that name.

tl;dr We do not yet have the answer to most of your questions.

A few comments are inlined below.

On 2017-10-12 3:08 PM, Ryan Cuprak wrote:

Hello,
 I have a couple of questions regarding the path forward with Java EE:
 1. Are implementations going to “license” the name in some legally binding way?
 2. Are there going to be requirements on licenses, such as an implementation has to support version X for Y number of years and release a new version within a specific period of time?
 3. How will enforcement of compliance be done?
 4. What were Sun/Oracle’s license requirements? Is that public by chance?

Assuming you mean the commercial TCK license, nope. You had to sign an NDA to even see a copy of the agreement.

 5. Is the JCP process being totally tossed?
 6. Are the spec leads for EE 8 going to lead the specs for EE4J?
 5. Will work continue in the JCP on EE 9 while EE4J gets going or is everything grinding to a halt?

 My thoughts, I’ve been trying to educate JUG members and my employer on the JCP. If someone had a complaint or suggestion I would tell them to submit feedback to the relevant spec. Should JUGs continue to pursue adopt-a-jsr? I would rather see a gradual evolution than a revamp of the process.

 Regarding the charter, instead of a “nimble” process, I would rather see goals - one release a year with a point release or consistent and predictable updates etc.. I wouldn’t start out a charter by pointing out flaws but that is just my opinion.

The charter is for the top-level project, and is entirely about governance. The project plans --- including intended delivery schedules --- will appear in the individual project proposals (e.g. Eclipse Glassfish, Eclipse Grizzly, etc...)

 BTW: I did see the blog entry "On Naming, or Why EE4J Does Not Suck” but I have to comment that as a JUG leader, the EE4J name definitely stirred passions. The last time I received negative feedback was when Oracle bought Sun. I received text messages and emails complaining before I saw the announcement.

--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(m) +1.613.220.3223