on 1/28/02 4:53 PM, "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, I was once directed there because I think their JSR for Java > generics is the most half-a**ed thing I've seen in awhile. (either DO > it or DON'T...don't HALF do it). So they direct me to this URL and yes > for $5000, I too can participate and have it matter what I think.. > ooooh. Where do I sign...oh wait...I'd rather not send Sun $5,000..oh > darn. That blows that idea ;-) > If you have $5k to blow then go for it! ;-) The ASF has a 'deal' with them and we don't pay fees. Also individuals shouldn't be charged anything to participate in the JCP ... I fought for about a year on that one ... you just have to sign a piece of sh*t NDA document... My current issues with the JCP surround the fact that companies can go there and start a JSR and then make it so that the spec, reference implementation and test kit can all be under a non-open-source license. This means that if say Oracle creates a JSR, then you can work for them for free to develop it and then you can have the 'privilege' to purchase the RI from them as a product. Now that is total bullshit. Case in point, look at JSR 107. There has been zero activity on that JSR because no one wants to work for Oracle for free. Oh yea, don't forget that at one point, Geir and I started the process of creating a JSR for a Java Template Language (ie: Velocity) and then backed out at the last minute because EC members thought that Velocity was too much competition with JSP and would have voted against it...even though we made a point to show that Java is lacking an easy to use Template language that has nothing to do with a specific text format (HTML, XML, web, etc). In other words, the JCP seems to be only about progressing Sun J2EE technologies... The JCP sucks balls. -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
