 
Use of JCP site is subject to the
JCP Terms of Use and the
Oracle Privacy Policy
 |
|
Executive Committee Meeting Minutes
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thursday May 14 |
Friday May 15 |
|
|
PMO |
|
|
|
ME EC |
SE/EE EC |
Total attendance: 9 |
Total attendance: 12 |
Since 75% of the ME EC was not present, that EC was
not quorate for this meeting on May 14. |
|
PMO |
|
|
|
ME EC |
SE/EE EC |
Total attendance: 9 |
Total attendance: 12 |
| Since 75% of the ME EC was not present, that EC was
not quorate
for this meeting on May 15. Since 75% of the SE/EE EC was present, that EC was quorate for this meeting on May 15. |
|
The ECs reviewed public and private minutes from the April 2009 meeting. After requesting some clarifications in the private minutes, both sets of minutes were approved.
Patrick presented the EC stats presentation and reminded EC members that they are expected to cast a vote during each JSR ballot. (Three members - Doug Lea, Nortel, and SpringSource - did not vote in the final ballot for JSR 235.)
Patrick reviewed the PMO's plans for JavaOne (see presentation). EC members requested that an informal get-together for EC members should not be scheduled for Friday, since some members were not planning to attend on that day. Patrick agreed to reschedule this event. Patrick announced the nominations for the annual awards, and noted that although we had requested nominations from JCP members, few were received. Don Deutsch suggested that rather than all nominations coming from the membership, a combination of PMO nominations and member nominations might be more appropriate. Also, it was suggested that if necessary we could extend the nomination and/or the voting process.
Patrick announced three new Star Spec Leads: Ed Burns from Sun, David Nuescheler from Day Software, and Mike Milikich from Motorola. During a discussion of alternative ways we could reward spec leads we discussed the overlap between the annual awards program and the Star Spec Leads program. Mike DeNicola noted the apparent disconnect and suggested that if someone deserved an Outstanding Spec Lead award then they should probably also be a Star Spec Lead. After briefly discussing the possibility of material rewards we concluded that publicity in the form of announcements in the press, and a formal letter of thanks from the JCP Chair and Executive Committees to the spec-lead's manager might be more appreciated. It was also suggested that a special ribbon for JavaOne badges might be a good idea.
Patrick reported that since membership fees for JUGs had been waived, many had become JCP members. EC members agreed that fees for non-profit organizations such as JUGs should be waived at the PMO's discretion rather than absolutely (some large non-profit organizations can readily afford the annual fees.) While discussing one of the primary motivations for JUG membership (the fact that institutional membership through a JUG is simpler than individual membership, since it doesn't require an individual JSPA) Doug Lea pointed out that this might cause problems if JUG members led a JSR or even participated in an Expert Group, since the JUG is not in a position - as an employer is - to grant IP rights. It was suggested that it might be necessary to request that participants sign an individual JSPA before such active participation. Patrick agreed to seek legal advice on this.
Patrick reported that the PMO proposed to utilize a web-based electronic voting service for the 2009 elections, rather than using Price Waterhouse Cooper. This would result in considerable savings. Members agreed that this would be a good idea, and requested that the PMO provide more details. Patrick promised to report back at a future meeting. During the discussion EC members suggested that the practice of calling members by phone to remind them to vote be stopped. They also suggested the need to "purge" the membership list of "inactive members". Patrick agreed to implement these suggestions.
Calinel Pasteanu reported that Sun has acquired the IP rights to the JSRs previously led by Qisda and that had become "orphaned". Sun intended to take over the Spec Lead role, and to complete those JSRs that had not yet been completed. While members agreed that this was good news, there was considerable discussion about exactly what process should be followed to effect the transfer of Spec Lead role.
It was noted that the Process Document clearly states that an active Maintenance Lead can transfer the Maintenance Lead role to another company without the need for a ballot. It also covers the case where the Maintenance Lead for a completed JSR steps down - under these circumstances the PMO should initiate a Transfer Ballot to transfer the Maintenance Lead role. However, the process to be followed in the case of JSRs that have not been completed is less clear. Members generally agreed that the such a transfer of Spec Lead role should not take place without Executive Committee approval, but were unsure about how to do so since this case did not seem to be explicitly covered in the Process Document. Eventually the ECs agreed that Cuihtlauac Alvarado, who had raised the initial concern, would propose a motion for an electronic vote to approve the transfer.
The new 2.7 version of the Process Document that took effect on 25 May (after the EC meeting) clarifies the process for transfers of JSRs that have not completed. That updated Process applies to all impacted JSRs, and was therefore used for the EC ballot. The Document includes the following language:“If a 2/3 majority of the members of the Expert Group find that a Spec Lead is being unresponsive, or if a 2/3 majority of the EC determines that the Expert Group is no longer capable of carrying out a vote, and the Spec Lead does not work to resolve the situation in a timely manner, the EC may direct the PMO to ask the Member who provided the Spec Lead to provide a replacement or may direct the PMO to ask a different Member to provide a replacement.”
The PMO therefore initiated two ballots.
The first, a Transfer Ballot to approve the transfer of the completed JSR 229 from Qisda to Sun was approved by 13 votes to 0. Voting results were:
The second, a request from the PMO to approve the transfer of the incomplete JSRs 230, 246, 259, and 266 from Qisda to Sun was approved by 13 votes to 1. Voting results were:
Patrick discussed the remaining tasks needed to implement the new version of the Process Document as revised through the Maintenance Release of JSR 215 (see presentation). EC members requested the PMO to take steps to ensure that Spec Leads understood the new requirements. Patrick agreed to do so.
Danny Coward provided an overview of the plans for the next release of Java SE. Doug Lea expressed the concern that by only operating within the OpenJDK community Sun would not ensure that the views of the entire Java community would be represented.
Harold Ogle demonstrated the features of the new jcp.org website. EC members made some suggestions for changes in the way in which registration was implemented, and Patrick promised to set up a follow-on phone conference during which these issues could be discussed in more detail.
During the morning of May 15, rather than following the pre-published agenda, Sean Sheedy made a detailed presentation on the state of the Java ME ecosystem and on the activities of the recently-formed Java ME Working Group. This was followed by a lively discussion of the issues he raised. No conclusions were reached, but EC members agreed that the discussions should be continued in future meetings of the Working Group.
