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
Public Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2017-04-25 to: 2017-05-08

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

Votes

Azul Systems, Inc.

Credit Suisse

Eclipse Foundation, Inc

Fujitsu Limited

Gemalto M2M GmbH

Goldman Sachs & Co.

Grimstad, Ivar

Hazelcast

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

IBM

Intel Corp.

Keil, Werner

London Java Community

MicroDoc

NXP Semiconductors

Oracle

Red Hat

SAP SE

Software AG

SouJava

Tomitribe

Twitter, Inc.

V2COM

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

On 2017-05-07 Software AG voted No with the following comment:
We are voting No on this umbrella JSR to be consistent with our No vote on JSR 376.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-07 Azul Systems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 V2COM voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 London Java Community voted Yes with the following comment:
If JSR 376 is delayed we only expect that to be a relatively short delay.  The rest of the Java 9 spec adds solid value to the language and platform.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Twitter, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
We still have concerns about JSR 376, which is why we voted No for it. Our Yes here is conditional on the JSR 376 lead and EG working closely to address our concerns and also the concerns that have been brought up by other members of the EC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Eclipse Foundation, Inc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Tomitribe voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-04-25 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
Currently, the successful completion of this umbrella JSR as defined cannot be predicted as the component JSRs have not all successfully proceeded through the JCP voting process. In addition, the compatibility regime for this JSR with the proposed contents is still being discussed.  The outcome will determine the likelihood of successful implementations and/or consumption by the Java Ecosystem.

Our "yes" vote in this Public Review Ballot is conditioned on the EG achieving consensus on the acceptability of the resolution on these two issues prior to this JSR entering the Final Ballot stage

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 2017-05-08 Gemalto M2M GmbH voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Credit Suisse voted Yes with the following comment:
Credit Suisse votes Yes in anticipation that JSR 376 addresses the migration concerns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 SAP SE voted Yes with the following comment:
While we've voted "No" for JSR 376 we're fine with the other contents of this umbrella JSR. We vote "Yes" for this JSR in the hope that the remaining issues around JSR 376 can still be resolved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Grimstad, Ivar voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 SouJava voted Yes with the following comment:
SouJava votes YES for the Java 9 Umbrela JSR. We are satisfied with how the specification has evolved. We understand that there are issues, but we trust the team to resolve the pending issues. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Hazelcast voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 Hewlett Packard Enterprise voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-04-26 Intel Corp. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-04-26 NXP Semiconductors voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-04-30 Keil, Werner voted No with the following comment:
This is an umbrella JSR also containing 376. Given the unresolved issues in the Jigsaw JSR I also vote the same here as it seems very unlikely the Java SE 9 Umbrella is released without 376. So this JSR isn't ready until every "puzzle" piece is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-03 Red Hat voted No with the following comment:
We are voting NO on this as we believe the SE9 umbrella needs JSR 376 resolved to proceed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-05 Goldman Sachs & Co. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2017-05-08 MicroDoc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------