Apache can still have a formal representation on the EG.
We do feel the technology is good - the problem is that Sun is, in
our opinion, in violation of the JSPA and therefore shouldn't be able
to lead any new JSRs until the problem is fixed.
But don't let that stop you from participating.
geir
On Aug 7, 2007, at 9:05 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Does the OpenJPA community want Apache to have representation on
the JPA 2.0 EG?
Yes, Apache voted no on JSR 317 on the principle that the proposed
Specification Lead is in violation of the JSPA by not offering a
TCK license without FOU restrictions for Java EE 5. But the OpenJPA
community can decide to try to influence the specification that
directly affects us.
Individuals from companies on a JCP Expert Group have access to
email discussions that are distributed internally via a "lurker"
alias. Feedback is sent through an individual representative from
that company to the Expert Group.
There would be an advantage for OpenJPA community members who are
not privy to an internal lurker alias, to be able to participate in
the discussion.
The Specification Lead for JSR 317 would set the participation
rules, which under JCP can include Non Disclosure Agreements. Any
OpenJPA community member who wanted to participate might be bound
by an agreement not to disclose information from the Expert Group
discussion.
In order to implement this, we might need a closed Apache-JPA mail
alias for discussion and an Expert Group representative to forward
comments from the closed alias to the expert group.
Would any OpenJPA community members be interested in participating
in the JSR-317 Expert Group under these conditions?
Please send comments to both dev and users aliases.
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
