JCP.next Master List of proposed changes

Updated Feb 9 2011

TODO for each item

Procedural issues

We decided to wait and see how radical the changes are before we decide whether or not to require that in-process JSRs adopt them.

Transparency

Expert Groups

Executive Committees

TCKs

Individual membership

IP

Licensing

Agility

Participation

Cleanup

Branding and compatibility

Miscellaneous

Additional suggestions

Address the issue of where litigation should be located. California, or elsewhere? California is an obstacle to Brazilian state involvement. According to Java Champion Douglas Jenssen this is also an issue within the US. He has said on the Java Champions alias:

The issue is a legal one, where do legal disputes between Sun/Oracle and a member -- whether individual, sponsored by his employer, or corporation -- get litigated. When I last met with the JCP, the answer was it has to be in California. No public institution such as a state university is going to agree to that, and many corporations will not agree either. Hence I was told there are no members from public universities, only from private ones that choose to agree.

The JSPA says:

Any action related to this Agreement will be governed by California law, excluding choice of law rules, provided, however that neither party has consented to the jurisdiction of any court located in the other party´s country of incorporation.