Just catching up on these horrendously long podcasts. ;-) I wanted to comment on Joe's speculation that Oracle made a calculated move to break the rules in what he felt might be an effort to disband the JCP. Dick mentioned this later on uttering the infamous quote, don't put down to malice that which can easily be explained by incompetence. Certainly Oracle is not incompetent in doing what they are comfortable at but, dealing with community seems to be outside of their comfort zone which leaves me with if not malice then what. Then it struck me that there is a theme running through a number of their problems in dealing with community in that they tend to treat their community as a customer group. This is evident it how Oracle is currently trying to "organize" JUGs into OUG clones. OUG are extensions of their business units. Following that line of thinking, wouldn't the JCP actually look like some sort of customer advisory program? I know that Oracle has been involved with the JCP from the beginning but then, they were just a member of some organization. My guess is that Oracle is a member of dozens of organizations and so the JPC wouldn't attract much attention. But now, that Oracle owns it, it property and it looks important and people are paying attention to it and it's a bit weird but shouldn't it be a CAP? And if so, do we care if a couple of people that aren't really our major customers decide not to participate?
One other point, the vote might have gone Oracle's way but most made a comment in support of Apache's position. This includes Credit Suisse. Cheers, Kirk -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
