Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Concerns from today's meeting, input for

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Couldn't agree with you more, Scott.  Today's
call was quite frustrating...

FYI, the "licensing agreement"
that is under discussion between Oracle and Eclipse (and has been dormant
for the last "10 months" per Mike's comment today) was last referenced
by Bill Shannon to the old ee4j-private group dated Jan 30, 2018 with a
subject line of "proposed Java trademark license
terms".  If you can not
find it, I could re-post the note to this group (it's quite lengthy).

I agree that we have done a considerable
amount of work already assuming that this licensing agreement would be
taken care of in short order...  Now that it has been almost 10 months
and I'm not aware of any (significant) progress in resolving this issue,
where do we stand?  I think we're getting to the point of no return...

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, MicroProfile and Java EE architect
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter



From:      
 Scott Stark <sstark@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 Jakarta specification
committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:      
 11/07/2018 04:22 PM
Subject:    
   [jakarta.ee-spec.committee]
Concerns from today's meeting,        input
for tomorrow
Sent by:    
   jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

It was concerning to hear that there is
a non-trivial Java trademark concern still in place looming over the Jakarta
EE spec process. Hence my question about where the Java trademark issue
is showing up. I'm still not really understanding how usage of java.* and
javax.* in the legacy package namespaces has a significant trademark concern
that has not already been addressed prior to Oracle even considering moving
the enterprise Java specs over to Eclipse.

In reviewing the only trademark agreement
that I or our legal team has seen, this has nothing to do with Java based
trademarks. It is an agreement on use of the Jakarta EE Compatible branding.

We have commitments that have timeframes
for withdrawal of support barring sufficient progress that are too close
for comfort to not have an understanding of such a basic issue. We are
certainly not willing to be involved in a spec process that continues to
require any type of veto power in the hands of a single vendor.

In terms of approval of a specification
process, we are only concerned with the spec process for Jakarta EE. If
a general process can be bootstrapped as a by-product, that is fine, but
we need to see the ability to move Java EE 8 into Jakarta EE 9 ASAP, including
how one bootstraps the specification text and evolution of the legacy javax.*
package APIs.
_______________________________________________
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