Section 4 Groups states:
"Groups do not have code repositories of their own but they may sponsor Projects, which do. "

Is this a prohibition or just an expectation? I'm unclear on the notion of "ownership" here and the implications. For example, at present the Hotspot group uses numerous repositories within the JDK7 forest, and while I would have said the Hotspot group owns them, it may be more correct to the say the JDK7 project owns them and the Hotspot group just uses them within the context of the JDK7 project. However, moving forward the Hotspot group has expressed a request that its repositories be independent of the current JDK version and so there are no hotspot repositories under jdk8 but rather they have been created as a hsx forest. Does this rule imply that there needs to be a "Hotspot Express" project, sponsored by the Hotspot group, which then owns the hsx repositories? Or does the jdk8 project implicitly own the hsx repositories (at least until jdk9 comes along)? The more I think about it the more unclear is the relationship between groups, projects and repositories.

---

Section 7 Project Roles:

The relationship between group membership and project "membership" is unclear. Do the authors/commiters/reviewers of a project have to be members of the sponsoring group? Do group members have any automatic role in the projects the group sponsors?

Does a project have to publicly list all its authors/commiters/reviewers ?

How do projects relate to each other? For example we presently have Project Lambda looking at defining closures with the intent to make them part of the Java language in JDK8. But the JDK8 project is responsible for defining everything in JDK8, so how is the connection between the two projects made? Is there a notion of sub-projects?

How do Projects relate to Java Specification Requests and the JCP process?

Both Project leads and Group Leads can delegate obligations but not authority. This would seem to be problematic if the lead may be away even for just a couple of weeks. Is there provision for appointing an interim-lead in such circumstances?

---

Technical Appeals Process:

There seems to be no time constraint on the formation of the panel of experts.

There seems to be no time-limit on when an appeal must be lodged after a decision by the OpenJDK Lead has been made.

---

Transitioning to these Bylaws

As part of the transition will the newly appointed Project leads, formulate and make public the initial set of authors/commiters/reviewers for each project?

Thank you,
David Holmes

Reply via email to