• JSRs by Platform
• JSRs by Technology
• JSRs by Stage
• JSRs by Committee
• List of All JSRs



Register for Site

Use of JCP site is subject to the JCP Terms of Use and the Oracle Privacy Policy


• About JCP
  • Program Overview
  • JCP Process Document
  • Calendar
  • JCP Members
  • Executive Committee
  • Elections
• Get Involved
  • Overview
  • Becoming a JCP Member
  • Java in Education
• Community Resources
  • Overview
  • Tutorials
  • JCP Podcasts
  • Spec Lead Guide
  • TCK Tool & Info
  • License Reference
• Community News
  • News
  • Programs & Awards
  • Press Releases
  • Success Stories
• FAQ
• Contact Us

JSR 364: Process Document 2.10 Change-log

Changes in version 9 (Public Review)

In addition to minor editorial and formatting changes, version 9 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes the following changes:

• 77: When should we implement the first JCP 2.10 election?

Changes in version 8

In addition to minor editorial and formatting changes, version 8 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes the following changes:

• 10: Verify that Process Doc definitions don't conflict with those in the JSPA
• This issue has been left open since we'll need to do this for every formal release
• 39: Create Membership Agreement for Affiliate Associate Members
• 40: Create Membership Agreement for Partner Members
• 69: Change requirement to announce when a JSR that was previously available standalone will in future only be bundled into a platform
• 70: Restructure Expert Group formation and composition sections
• 74: Clean up references to the length of JSR ballots
• 78: Section 3.6.2 - Relinquishing ownership does not belong in the Maintenance section
• 79: Suggested changes to version 7 (from Mike DeNicola)
• 80: Change Affiliate member to Associate member
• 81: Create the Employer Contribution Agreement

Changes in version 7

In addition to minor editorial and formatting changes, version 7 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes the following changes:

• 24: Add named anchors for all defined terms in the Process Document
• 55: Permit employed individuals to join as Full Members even if their employer is a Member
• This was fixed earlier, but the issue has only just been marked Resolved
• 58: Incorrect capitalization of "Eligible Members"
• 59: Should we replace the term "Contribution Agreement" with "Contributor Agreement"?
• 60: Circular definitions of Affiliate Member and Affiliate Membership Agreement
• 62: The defined term "Maintenance Lead Member" is unnecessary
• 63: Change "Public Draft Specification Approval Ballot" to "Public Review Ballot"
• 64: Fix various typos and editorial problems reported by Mike DeNicola
• 65: Additional editorial changes suggested by Mike DeNicola
• 66: Allow more flexibility in length of the EC Nomination period
• 73: Make all references to other sections of the Process Document dynamic

Changes in version 6 (revised EDR)

• 28: Make Maintenance Review Ballots 14 days instead of 7 days (additional fix)
• 54: Clarify that no Employer Contribution Agreement is required from University professors
• 55: Permit employed individuals to join as Full Members even if their employer is a Member
• 56: Maintenance Review period can be 2 weeks at PMO's discretion

Changes in version 5 (EDR)

In addition to minor formatting changes, version 5 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes the following changes:

• Ensure new/changed text is redlined
• 48: Should Community Seats be held for only one year? (no)
• Add language to prohibit a Partner Member who is employed by a company that is also represented on the EC from taking an additional (second) seat

Changes in version 4

In addition to minor formatting changes, version 4 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes the following changes:

• 53: Before publication: verify internal section references
• Slight re-wording in section 3.2.2.1
• 41: Add option for Spec Lead to voluntarily be Dormant in Process (additional changes)
• 48: Should Community Seats be held for only one year? (clarify that this is still unresolved)

Changes in version 3

In addition to many formatting and editorial changes, version 3 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes changes to address the following issues:

• 3: Adjust Section 1.1, Transparency, to include Affiliate Members
• 5: Changes to Appendix B of the Process Document
• 8: Revise Section 2.4, Form the Expert Group, to include Affiliate Level Members (additional changes)
• 11: Member vs. Member Representative confusion
• 21: Fee structure changes
• 30: Should the review period be extended when an Expert Group publishes an update to a milestone draft?
• 31: Require Spec/Maintenance Lead to make statement for Release Ballots on expectations for follow-on work
• 33: Although there is no TCK for process-change JSRs we ought to "test" whether we successfully implement the changes we specify
• 37: Additional transarency requirements
• 41: Add option for Spec Lead to voluntarily be Dormant in Process
• 44: Track the employers of individual Full Members who are employed and associates of Full Corporate Members
• 51: Clarify Maintenance process

Changes in version 2

Version 2 of the draft of Process Document 2.10 includes changes to address membership levels, the election process, and a number of other minor issues.

Specifically, the following issues have been addressed:

• 1: Add a section in the Process Document for Membership
• 2: Modify Process Document Definitions to reference Membership levels and other changes
• 4: Revise Executive Committee Policies and Procedures
• 8: Revise Section 2.4, Form the Expert Group, to include Affiliate Level Members
• 9: Update Section 1.1.2 of the Process Document
• 13: The definition of Agent is too broad
• 14: The link to http://www.w3.org/2001/05/rfc2777 should be formatted to indicate that it's a live link
• 19: Clarify Member definition
• 27: The Process Document ought to permit more flexibility in the timing of the annual elections
• 28: Make Maintenance Review Ballots 14 days instead of 7 days
• 32: Clarify the meaning of the term "conditional yes vote" in the Process Document
• 45: Should EC candidates have to choose whether they want to run for an elected or a community seat?
• 46: Full members as well as Affiliate members may be recognized as Contributors to a JSR