The Java Community Process(SM) Program - JSRs: Java Specification Requests

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

JSR #289
SIP Servlet v1.1
Final Approval Ballot
Ballot duration: 2008-07-08 to: 2008-07-21

These are the final results of the Final Approval Ballot for JSR #289. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.

Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation

Eclipse Foundation, Inc

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.

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2008-07-11 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
By the agreement that forms the JCP, other than reciprocity rules for licensing and 3 specific compatibility conditions (including passing the TCK compatibility test suite) "the Spec Lead agrees not to impose any contractual condition or covenant that would limit or restrict the right of any licensee to create or distribute such Independent Implementations."  It is our view that prohibiting use of compatible implementations in particular products is inconsistent with this promise not to limit implementations. When TCK Licenses are confidential and not viewable by the EC, we ask the Spec Lead whether the compatibility test license restricts how implementations may be used as a condition of being able to test for compatibility.  For this JSR, the Spec Lead made the licenses available to the EC and we did not see any inappropriate restrictions on implementations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-13 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-14 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-15 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-15 Suleiman, Hani voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-17 Nortel voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-19 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-21 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 2008-07-21 Eclipse Foundation, Inc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-10 Red Hat voted Yes with the following comment:
The spec lead of the EE6 specification has confirmed that the EE6 TCK would contain no "field of use restrictions", as originally raised by Apache with regard to another JSR (i.e. the SE TCK licensing). That is a good thing.

However, in the absence of an explicit JSPA rule that would forbid such field-of-use restrictions, we will remain worried that a similar issue might resurface anytime, for any JSR.

Consequently, in the future, for any submitted JSR (by SUNW or not), we will specifically expect the spec lead to provide clear information on that aspect and take the answer in account when casting our vote.

We recommend that work for another Spec Revision starts immediately to address lack of concurrency control, integration with other communications protocols (Diameter, SS7, XMPP, etc.) and alignment with context aware stateful frameworks such as Web Beans

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-09 SAS Institute Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-07-10 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------