These are the final results of the Final Approval Ballot for JSR #198. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.
JSR198
StageFinal Approval Ballot
Ballot durationFeb 7, 2006 to Feb 21, 2006
Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation
BEA Systems
Borland Software Corporation
Fujitsu Limited
Google Inc.
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel Corp.
Lea, Doug
Nortel
Oracle
Red Hat
SAP SE
SAS Institute Inc.
Suleiman, Hani
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2006-02-20 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 2006-02-21 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 BEA Systems voted Abstain with the following comment:
Consider this a mild protest vote, since there are more than enough votes to pass this ballot and there is no technical reason why this API could not be implemented in Eclipse (no change from my previous position), but I doubt that it will be, given current industry momemtum and most people will see that as confrontational. Hopefully the market will sort it all out in time. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 SAP SE voted Yes with the following comment:
Cross-IDE APIs may be useful for certain classes of plug-ins when support of many IDEs is the topmost concern. Nevertheless, many plug-in developers choose a specific API such as Eclipse 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 an optional Java standard, it will be one of many possible IDE plug-in architectures and will need to prove itself in the market. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 SAS Institute Inc. voted Abstain with the following comment:
I have similar doubts that others have stated regarding the probability of this standard gaining traction in the market, especially given the large market momentum behind the Eclipse IDE and the unlikeliness that the Eclipse Foundation will move to implement this standard.  As such, I have concerns that this standard has the potential to fragment the market in a way that is counter-productive to its stated goal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-08 Red Hat voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-09 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-13 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-13 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-16 Intel Corp. voted Abstain with the following comment:
Many feel the best approach is to create extensions directly for particular IDEs in order to utilize the full power of each IDE.  There seems to be a healthy competition of competing popular IDEs and no consensus on the desirablility of a single standard for IDE extensions. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-21 Suleiman, Hani voted Abstain with the following comment:
Very few of the current crop of 'state of the art' IDEs have adopted this specification or participated significantly in its production. User expectations have changed significantly since the initial proposal of this JSR. As a result, the specification is unlikely to be adopted, at least at this point, by a significant number of the top-tier vendors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-02-20 Apache Software Foundation voted Yes with the following comment:
I agree with Hani that this spec faces some real challenges for adoption, but from the POV of the ASF, that wouldn't be a reason to not let this particular flower try to bloom.  We would have preferred an open-source RI, and urge Oracle to consider this going foward.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------