[Electricity outages tonight mean my DNS is down. But looking at the JCP in a text browser the mail archives are at:
http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/jcp-interest.html Time for more spam :) Hen On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Robert Simmons wrote: > > > > But who speaks for JCP? > > > > Those who chose to be involved. > > I'm not sure I'm conveying the question properly. As an Apache committer, > I am unable to speak on behalf of the ASF. Equally, as a JCP member I > would not be able to speak on behalf of JCP. > > > > While you offer a nice brochure view of the JCP, the other side is that > > > the JCP is a large company dominated organisation which conducts its > > > business behind closed doors and has a high cost to effective entry. > > > > High cost ? Last I checked you could be a voting member for a nominal fee. > > You could be on a single expert comittee for free. Any fees are the bare > > minimum for the administration of the site and services in my opinon. > > > > Source: http://www.jcp.org/en/participation/membership > > commercial entities: $5000 > > educational/non-profit organizations: $2000 > > individuals: $0 > > existing licensees: $0 > > > > If your company or institution cannot afford those fees than they have bigger > > problems to deal with. > > I wouldn't be surprised if 5000 is more than most places spend on tools > for an individual in a year. For a place with a lot of developers, the > money probably quickly vanishes, but small shops are unlikely to spend > such money. > > > > An individual can join one project without having to pay ridiculous sums > > > [for the individual] and the individual cannot join a project which is to > > > do with their work for their company [due to an effective NDA in the > > > registration]. > > > > That is the fault of the company, not the JCP. If the company doesnt want you > > giving out their intellectual property than you probably wont be able to > > submit it to the JCP. The jcp intellectual rights rules are there because if > > some bozo joined and submitted intellectual property from microsoft for > > example, the JCP could get sued for releasing it in a JSR. The way it is, you > > give the JCP rights to the info. In which case only people microsoft can sue > > are the errant employees. > > I was reading the registration smallprint the other day. If I have an > individual membership, it states that I am not allowed to release > information to my company gained from my membership. So, if I work on JSP > at work, and were to join the JSF JSR, it would seem tricky to work on JSF > at work. > > I've also not seen much at the JCP that details what happens to my > individual membership once I finish on a JSR. Is that it? Or am I allowed > one JSR at a time? > > > > Projects appear to stagnate in the JCP and others appear to fast track > > > through due to Java?Sun?JCP's marketing needs. > > > > Thats the bitch of a democracy. Things are voted on in the JCP. If oyu loose > > the vote *shrug* campaign harder next time. > > Where are the results of these votes? The site shows the major members of > the JCP voting initially, and then shows the panel of experts voting. I > see no JCP-wide voting. > > > > Do the JCP have official PR people to show why the JCP is not the dark > > > picture it is often portrayed as? > > > > Hmm never seen it protrayed that way. Im sure some have that opinion but it > > isnt common enough to qualify as "often". > > I can't say I've ever seen an article or blog that speaks lovingly of the > JCP, whereas I've seen quite a few that portray it negatively. > > > > Or is it a loose federation. In which > > > case, should the ASF be picking up those threads as a spokeperson for the > > > JCP > > > > Hmm, that would be tough. Sort of like speaking for the entire United > > Nations. Dissenters are abounds. > > And yet to use your anology, the ASF are on the Security Council, so would > seem a major speaker for the JCP process. Indeed, due to the publicity > over the ASF's stance to open up the JCP process, they would seem a > natural speaker. > > > > and explaining just why the ASF and Doug Lea are able to stop the huge > > > corporates from turning Java into some system designed to make them money > > > and not a better future for Java. > > > > *Yanks the soapbox out from under his feet.* Your view on things is > > rediculously naive. If you think one person or one company can "stop the huge > > coporates" than you need a reality check. > > I'm happy to accept a cynical: They can't be :) > > > The thing that stops them is > > popular opinion. If they try to do somethign lame, he JCP smacks them in the > > teeth for it. Life is grand. The JCP does have its issues but they are of a > > different nature than you percieve. > > Popular opinion of the JCP members? How many members are individual > developers? Are developers working for corporate members able to discuss > at the JCP, or are they held back by having to go through a single legal > official for that company? > > > The drive to open source the JDK is being > > driven not by an attempt to stop the corporations but by a growing belief > > that Sun doesnt have the resources needed to handle all of the changes in > > java. > > Where are the mail archives to back this up? Where do the members of the > JCP discuss the state of the Java world? > > > > To those of us who have not seen the insides of the JCP, it looks like a > > > large, probably political and argumentative body of powerful entities. > > > > So join it. Whats stopping you? > > Lack of money, lack of a JSR to join, and lack of awareness that there was > any cross-JCP community in existence to join. > > > > While it may be a good thing compared to Microsoft's dictatorship, it's > > > almost definitely less efficient, and not the open system it should be. > > > > Microsoft does what it wants and when it wants. (notice the period) When .NET > > is 2 years old and starts to show the defects and missing features we have > > seen in the JDK, microsoft will fix it when they get good and damn well ready > > to. Further, if you think they arent doing .NET to dive their sales of > > windows than we will have to upgrade you from naive to stupid. > > They're reacting to the fact that their languages were looking pathetic > compared to Java. In 2 years .Net will start to get lumbered down with > hacks and additions and in 5 years it'll be as bad as the current Windows > stuff is now. Thankfully the current clean MS system seems to be worrying > enough that Java is making more aggressive language changes. > > > Microsoft has > > shown *REPEATEDLY* to be an unethical company that believes it is above the > > law. > > I'm an Apple/Linux user. I'm currently using Windows at work in an effort > to make sure I continue true to the nature of being able to develop on any > platform. Being a pawn in Jobs' surprise plans is not much more fun than > in Gates' empire building. > > > You have a choice. Go to .NET and leave your business, economic and personal > > future to your trust in Microsoft. > > Reality is, that while an MS job is not very exciting for the next 5 > years, it's probably quite safe. Tell that to the Ruby developer working > on the next big thing. > > > Alternatively you could stick with an > > admitedly flawed but still functional and respected process in java. Pick > > number 1 and you risk proving Orwell correct. No thanks. > > Or I could raise a voice in the hope of seeing a better choice. It still > dissapoints me that Perl users gets the Apocalypse and the Exogesis for > Perl 6, while us Java users get a bit of legality at the JCP and a few > years of rumours. > > Hen > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
