Re: [ee4j-community] Process Question

[Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ryan,

As Mike previously mentioned a lot of this has to be worked out.  I'm hoping the project charter will be approved on the 23rd of Oct which will then allow the PMC to be formed and so on...

That said I'll take a stab at some of the likely directions.

On 12 October 2017 at 20:08, Ryan Cuprak <rcuprak@xxxxxxxxx> 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?

I really don't know yet, but I'm sensing that most folks want some sort of certification / compliance pass mark.  Whether that's a legally binding license I think is up to the community to decide.

 

 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?

Same as above.

 

 3. How will enforcement of compliance be done?

If compliance is mandated, then a TCK like mechanism would seem to be the common approach here (again, only if this what the community wants it)

 

 4. What were Sun/Oracle’s license requirements? Is that public by chance?

Mike covered that I think.

 

 5. Is the JCP process being totally tossed?

I'd say yes.  Oracle doesn't want EE4J governed in the JCP and frankly nor do any of the vendors and nor do a good chunk of the users (I appreciate there are more than just 1 who would like it to stay there).  Again I feel that way not because Oracle was evil or terrible, but the fact remains that the JCP is not an independent body, and so I think something new is required.

 

 6. Are the spec leads for EE 8 going to lead the specs for EE4J?

Up to the community to decide but I think you've already seen RedHat and IBM offer to take lead on several JSRs and Oracle (not binding them to anything here) also indicated that they would take leadership for other specs if asked to do so.

 

 5. Will work continue in the JCP on EE 9 while EE4J gets going or is everything grinding to a halt?

I think that will stop, would need an Oracle answer on that one though.

 

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.

I'll be encouraging all Adopt a JSR folks to simply move to the EE4J community and engage in a traditional open source project manner.  The final barriers have effectively been removed, so there won't be a need for a separate programme, just that folks contribute at Eclipse :-).

 

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.

That's good feedback, I think another version of the charter is coming out in the next few days, so *please* do comment on that aspect again there.

 

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.

Naming is hard, naming by committee is impossible.  That said EE4J is the Eclipse Project name and will not be the actual branding / certification name, which is something the community can come up with (after much bikeshedding one suspects ;p).

Thanks Ryan they were thought provoking Q's!

 

 -Ryan

_______________________________________________
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