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 #379
Java^TM SE 9 Release Contents
JSR Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2016-06-14 to: 2016-06-27

These are the final results of the JSR Review Ballot for JSR #379. The EC has approved this ballot.

Votes

Arm Limited

Azul Systems, Inc.

Credit Suisse

Eclipse Foundation, Inc

Ericsson AB

Fujitsu Limited

Gemalto M2M GmbH

Goldman Sachs & Co.

Hazelcast

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

IBM

Intel Corp.

Keil, Werner

London Java Community

Magnusson Jr, Geir

MicroDoc

NXP Semiconductors

Oracle

Red Hat

SAP SE

Software AG

SouJava

TOTVS

Twitter, Inc.

V2COM

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

On 2016-06-21 TOTVS voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-22 Azul Systems, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
Azul's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR.

Azul would like to respond to LJC's request for EG participation by additional JVM vendors by formally nominating Simon Ritter, Deputy CTO at Azul, for the JSR expert group.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 Software AG voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 SouJava voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 Arm Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with the following comment:
Fujitsu's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the licensing terms.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 Intel Corp. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 Magnusson Jr, Geir voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 Hazelcast voted Yes with the following comment:
Hazelcast likes the overall content of the JSR and therefore voted yes. However we still have some worries on possible backwards compatibility issues due to Jigsaw but expect those issues to be fixed before the final release.

According to the LJCs comment, we are also not happy with the late timing of this JSR. The RI has already merged together and there is almost no chance to change the content of this specification by now or for alternative implementations to build a complaint Java 9 implementation in time.

As with Azul Systems, Hazelcast would be happy to provide a member in the EG as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-22 Credit Suisse voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-22 Keil, Werner voted Yes with the following comment:
I agree with LJC's comments, that an earlier proposal of this JSR would have been in the interest of the community, independent implementors as well as the JCP.next ideas of increased transparency and agility. 
Filing this JSR so late compared to the progress of Java SE 9 feels more like a "Waterfall" approach.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-22 Eclipse Foundation, Inc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 V2COM voted Yes with the following comment:
V2COM also agrees with LJC and others that the JSR could've been filed earlier to allow more collaboration and alternative implementations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-22 MicroDoc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-27 Twitter, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-17 Red Hat voted Yes with the following comment:
Red Hat's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the licensing terms.  Red Hat would prefer a licensing model that creates an open arena for everyone, including those not members of the JCP and removes any ability for one individual or vendor to exert undue control over a standard. We are an open source company and hence would like to see such a licensing model for JCP contributions. Note however, that this comment is not necessarily directed at the license terms for this JSR, but is a statement of Red Hat's preferred licensing model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-17 Gemalto M2M GmbH voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 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 2016-06-21 SAP SE voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-15 London Java Community voted Yes with the following comment:
We are very happy with the technical content and have high hopes that it will increase the longevity of Java in the age of containers and smaller devices.

We are disappointed with the relatively late release of this JSR. Since much of the RI and TCK has already been built, it makes it much harder for independent implementations to reach the market in a timely manner.

We see that Red Hat, IBM, Google and Oracle will likely make up the EG and we hope to also see wider participation from other JVM vendors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2016-06-19 NXP Semiconductors voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------