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 #236
Concurrency Utilities for Java^TM EE
Public Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2013-02-05 to: 2013-02-18

These are the final results of the Public Review Ballot for JSR #236. The EC has approved this ballot.

Votes

Andreani, Stefano

Aplix Corporation

Arm Limited

Azul Systems, Inc.

Cinterion Wireless Modules GmbH

CloudBees

Credit Suisse

Eclipse Foundation, Inc

Ericsson AB

Fujitsu Limited

Goldman Sachs & Co.

Google Inc.

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Intel Corp.

Keil, Werner

London Java Community

Nokia Corporation

Oracle

Red Hat

SAP SE

SouJava

TOTVS

Twitter, Inc.

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

On 2013-02-05 Red Hat voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-05 Goldman Sachs & Co. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-08 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-09 Aplix Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-12 Azul Systems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-13 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 2013-02-14 Cinterion Wireless Modules GmbH voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Twitter, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Eclipse Foundation, Inc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 London Java Community voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Andreani, Stefano voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-09 SAP SE voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-11 Intel Corp. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-09 Keil, Werner voted Yes with the following comment:
There are at least 2 issues with JSR 236.
First, that like several others, mostly under the EE 7 Umbrella this JSR applies different licenses to its API ("Binary part of the Spec") than mentioned in the JSR detail page. As pointed out in this JCP.next JIRA ticket: http://java.net/jira/browse/JSR358-49
Second, it was started way back in the era of J2EE, and unfortunately hasn't integrated so well with modern day concepts, especially CDI like other Java EE JSRs. Particularly its ManagedScheduledExecutorService and Trigger look like a redundant concept to EJB Timer Service, introducing unneccessary proliferation of Java EE in a version that was hoping to add more simplicity and less complexity for the benefit of developers and admins alike.
Although they may be used together with JSR 352 (Batch), the concept of Batch Executor and Batch Mode of this JSR also sounds somewhat redundant and not fully integrated with JSR 352 yet. Hoping those synergies may arise in actual implementations and products, while they are not fully clear from the specs yet.

Nevertheless I vote "Yes", hoping these issues, not all of them subject to this JSR alone can be sorted out soon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-15 CloudBees voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-18 SouJava voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2013-02-08 Arm Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------