 
Use of JCP site is subject to the
JCP Terms of Use and the
Oracle Privacy Policy
 |
|
Executive Committee Meeting Minutes |
Thursday, 24 May 2018 |
PMO |
|
Executive Committee |
Total Attendance: 19 of 25 voting members
|
Since 75% of the EC's voting members were present, the EC was quorate for this meeting. |
The EC Standing Rules state the following penalties for non-attendance at EC meetings (note that those who participate in face-to-face meetings by phone are officially counted as absent):
Missing two meetings in a row results in a loss of voting privileges until two consecutive meetings have been attended.
Missing five meetings in a row, or missing two-thirds of the meetings in any consecutive 12-month period results in loss of the EC seat.
There were no changes in voting status as a result of this meeting.
Philippe Robin is a new alternate for ARM. Richard Wood is a new alternate for Credit Suisse. Götz Lindenmaier is a new alternate for SAP. Balasubramaian (Bala) Viswanathan is a new alternate for HPE.
Heather reviewed the results of the Special EC Election and welcomed Alibaba as a ratified EC Member. Their term is effective as of today (they were excused from attending this meeting) util November 2018.
Heather reviewed the open action items. Mike will come back to his action item and advise if it should be closed.
Heather presented the usual EC stats (see the presentation for details).
Georgi Stanev from Software AG Sofia office provided an overview of Java and Software AG (see the presentation for details).
Heather gave an update on the Membership renewals effort (see the presentation for details). Don asked about the delay between the implementation of JSR 364 in 2016 and now, in terms of the number of Individual Members who have not responded regarding the new membership levels. Heather explained that the PMO has been working to process new agreements, and now that the 500 plus new agreements have been processed, we will go back to the 300 Individual Members and process their renewal, migration or cancellation, as appropriate. The PMO will aim to complete this task prior to the 2018 JCP EC Elections in the Fall of 2018.
Mike provided an update from the Eclipse Foundation on the migration of Java EE 8 (see the presentation for details). Mike invited EC Members not yet involved in the Jakarta EE Working Group to participate. Don asked about the definitive source of truth if there is not one reference implementation, but multiple. Mike indicated that would be decided in the Working Group. Andres asked about preventing non compatible implementations from claiming compatibility. The Working Group is looking at other standards best practices - there will be agreements and audit rights. Volker stated it was hard to prove certification when the TCK is closed. David clarified that compatibility is currently self-certification.
Martijn presented an initiative from the London Java Community on crowdfunding smaller projects falling behind since the release of Java SE 9 (see the presentation for details). Andres asked about the types of projects that would be included. Martijn clarified for open source and non commercially supported projects. Don asked if there was a corporate entity to be invoiced for a corporation to pay an invoice? Martijn indicated LJC is a legal entity and could provide invoices. Jessica asked about how corporations could see where the funds go. Martijn explained that it could be project based or to a particular engineer. Gil offered the opinion that crowdfunded projects should be separated so that corporations could fund specific projects of interest. He also wondered about tracking post Java 8 adoption. Simon stated that JDK 8 support in January 2018 would be a decision point. Tony suggested that with a six month release cadence, the community would focus on LTS releases. Amelia requested that Oracle make a public statement about their support offerings.
Heather summarized the latest meeting of the EC Communications Working Group (see the presentation for details) - the group needs a new lead in order to continue. Heather asked for volunteers to continue the work started by Tomitribe as lead for the past 12 months.
Leonardo Lima gave an update on continued discussions with the Eclipse IoT working group - at this point there is not much interest from the community regarding interest in evolving technologies related to Java ME. Florian thanked Leo for his efforts to investigate interest, the findings are not a surprise since the space is relatively mature. Leo will follow developments in OpenJDK and in the embedded space and will follow up with discussions in the JCP EC as needed.
Don stated that Oracle had looked into the question of evolving the JCP program into the future, and recommends starting another JCP.Next JSR to evolve and streamline the process for consistency and to reflect current development methods. Heather presented some suggestions for consideration in a future JSR (see the presentation for details). Mark requested a stronger relationship with OpenJDK team, not just the EC acting as a rubber stamp. Mike DeNicola agreed recognizing platform reality makes sense. Mike Milinkovich stated that the process is there to enable independent implementations - two to three compatible implementations of Java SE seems like a lot of baggage for a small set of implementations. The only things we must do are things in the JSPA. Gil commented that the IP flow and rules of the JCP program add value. Simon asked that we consider the value the Java SE Expert Group can provide - JEPs should be designed to pass through the EG for approval - they do not have enough influence on that. Mark commented that if we did not have the JCP program, we would have to add those things into OpenJDK and keeping JCP was the path on least resistance. Martijn has concerns about OpenJDK listening to users - there is oversight needed from the community. David brought back the concern of the community not upgrading beyond Java SE 8. The EC should discuss and provide a health check on industries, outreach and adoption. Tim voiced that the Java 9 JSR interaction with the JCP EC was healthy and he would be worried about taking that away. Gil requested that we talk about deprecation policy and give feedback. Heather summarized that we want more of a relationship with OpenJDK, a voice for user groups back to Spec Leads for standalone JSRs as well as OpenJDK, continue to enable independent implementations as we consider the items in a JCP.Next JSR. Heather will start a poll to select a time for the JCP.Next Working Group Meetings to resume and they will meet in June to file the JSR for review and approval.
Andres presented an updated JSR Review on the status of JSR 377, which is coming up on a third Renewal Ballot (see the presentation for details).
We reviewed the plans for our next meeting - the first public EC meeting of 2018. Agenda will be JCP.Next and possibly an update from the LJC on Crowdfunding project.
Heather presented proposed dates for the 2019 JCP EC Meeting (see the presentation for details); there will be a poll to select the 2019 Spring Face to Face meeting location. Possible options are Japan, China, and India.
Heather thanked Software AG for hosting the meeting and reviewed plans for the group dinner in the evening, and the meeting adjourned.
