Thanks for the clarification. I now understand the issue you and Geir are raising.
> On 6 Feb 2011, at 16:59, Mike Milinkovich wrote: > > > At the risk of picking a barely-healed scab, isn't TCK licensing outside > of > > the scope of OpenJDK governance? > > > > I understand how --- if you are so inclined --- you can start pulling at > the > > threads to the point where every issue related to Java can be conflated > with > > OpenJDK governance. But I don't see how that is going to be a > particularly > > useful or constructive exercise. > > TCK licensing as a general commercial topic is undoubtedly beyond the scope > of the OpenJDK governance and indeed none of the OpenJDK community's > business. > > However, the availability of a no-charge TCK license to members of the > OpenJDK community to ensure their contributions and private builds do not > diverge from the JSRs they implement is a key part of the dynamic of the > OpenJDK community. Without it, the ability of community members who do not > have a private agreement with Oracle to contribute in a meaningful way is > severely restricted. > > As such surely falls well within the oversight of the governance board. > Clearly it's a tough subject and must not become an excuse to pry into > commercially sensitive contracts, but it's entirely reasonable for the > community to be assured that the TCK is in fact available as promised.
