These are the final results of the Public Review Ballot for JSR #198. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.

JSR198

StagePublic Review Ballot

Ballot durationOct 11, 2005 to Oct 17, 2005

Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation

Apple Computer, Inc.

BEA Systems

Borland Software Corporation

Fujitsu Limited

Google Inc.

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Intel Corp.

Lea, Doug

Nortel

Oracle

Progress Software

Red Hat

SAP SE

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2005-10-13 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
Sun is happy to support this JSR.  It seems desirable to allow IDE
plug-in developers to target a common IDE plug-in standard that 
supports a wide range of IDEs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-13 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-14 Apple Computer, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-14 Progress Software voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-14 Red Hat voted Yes with the following comment:
JBoss is happy to support a JSR that will make it easier to develop plugins that will be able to run on a wide range of IDEs, hence giving more choice to developers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-14 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
The following is a general comment, not specific to this particular JSR.  Like many other Java SE/EE (but not ME) click through licenses, the click through for this draft includes the right to discuss the draft "with other licensees (under this or a substantially similar version of this Agreement) of the Specification". The draft "may only be used in accordance with the license terms set forth herein."    What about discussions where you can't be sure participants are licensees?  Public mail lists? Other standards orgs?  Newspaper articles?  Wording like this is very common in click throughs for Java SE/EE drafts (possibly left over inadvertantly).  We encourage Spec Leads in the future to revise this wording to make clear public discussion is permitted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 Nortel voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the licensing terms.  IBM supports licensing models that create an open and level playing field by allowing third parties to create independent implementations of Java Specifications and that do not allow individuals or companies to exercise unnecessary control for proprietary advantage.  We support open source as a licensing model for contributions in the JCP, and would hope others will support this direction. This comment is not necessarily directed at the current business or license terms for this JSR, however, it is a statement of IBM's preferred licensing model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 Apache Software Foundation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 SAP SE voted Yes with the following comment:
Cross-IDE APIs may be useful for certain classes of plug-ins whereever support of as many IDEs is the topmost concern. Nevertheless, many plug-in developers choose a specific API such as the Eclipse OSGi runtime in order to fully exploit the capabilities of the underlying IDE. Which way to go is a trade-off decision that needs to be consciously made. Even though JSR 198 will advance to a Java standard, it will be one of many possible IDE plug-in architectures and will need to prove itself in the market.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-10-17 BEA Systems voted Yes with the following comment:
While it does appear that JSR 198 can be implemented by multiple IDEs as advertised by its advocates, we remain concerned that the JCP would choose to endorse a new technology when a pervasive alternative exists in the marketplace At best this sends a confusing message to IDE pluig-in developers.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------