On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Jeb Dasteel <jeb....@oracle.com>wrote:
Dear JUG leaders,
There has been quite a lot of discussion over the past week about our JCP
EC nomination. We thought we would offer our perspective. We nominated
Hologic, as with Credit Suisse earlier, to inject some much needed Java
end-user and business perspective into the Executive Committee, as opposed
to standards, technologist, technology vendor, and developer community
perspectives - all of which are already well represented. Those roles also
overlap, as we have well-recognized technologists, like Josh Bloch, who are
also representing vendor interests. JCP members may disagree with the need
for more end-user perspective on the EC, but we think it's an important view
that has been underrepresented to date. Having the perspective of a company
whose business depends on Java technology -- not as a technology vendor, but
as an informed consumer of Java technology -- is valuable.
JSRs are proposed by various JCP members, and the EC is the gate to
starting them off, approving them along the way, and approving them when
they are complete. Technical work goes on in expert groups. Implementation
is done by spec leads in multiple forums, one of which is OpenJDK. Ideally,
the EC would actively encourage the various expert groups to be the forums
for technical decision-making, sorting through issues, and advancing Java.
The EC then fulfills the role of making sure that the expert groups are
functioning properly to meet the goals of the JCP overall, as reflected in
EC approvals. Having the EC act in this capacity is not, as some have said,
"rubber stamping" Oracle's desires.