11 messages in net.java.dev.jugs.jug-leadersRe: [jug-leaders] JCP EC| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Jeb Dasteel | Oct 25, 2010 8:05 am | |
| Frans Thamura | Oct 25, 2010 8:27 am | |
| John Yeary | Oct 25, 2010 8:38 am | |
| Frans Thamura | Oct 25, 2010 8:41 am | |
| Jim Bethancourt | Oct 25, 2010 9:29 am | |
| John Yeary | Oct 25, 2010 9:54 am | |
| John Yeary | Oct 25, 2010 10:01 am | |
| Frans Thamura | Oct 25, 2010 3:18 pm | |
| dan_...@slinestop.com | Oct 26, 2010 5:30 am | |
| Frans Thamura | Oct 26, 2010 5:33 am | |
| Jim Bethancourt | Oct 27, 2010 8:41 am |
| Subject: | Re: [jug-leaders] JCP EC | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | John Yeary (john...@gmail.com) | |
| Date: | Oct 25, 2010 10:01:16 am | |
| List: | net.java.dev.jugs.jug-leaders | |
I like the idea of a community voting. The JCP seats are supposed to be our representation. It would be interesting if the aggregate block for a community were posted. For example, we would allow Java.net members to cast votes (UP/DOWN) on a JSR and allow voting opinions to be posted in details. That way you would get a poll type result and if you want to see details you can dig further. It could also have a star rating system on the comments to allow the best UP/DOWN comments to float to the top.
John
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Jim Bethancourt <jimb...@gmail.com>wrote:
A couple of ideas (feel free to add to them):
*EC Community Seat*
Perhaps it would be best to take an approach of specifying an EC seat as a
"community seat" that votes only but doesn't really write any voting
remarks, and the aggregate up/down vote would be the vote of the "seat".
This would allow all parties who are interested in the outcome of a JSR
vote to genuinely take part in and influence the outcome. Perhaps this
could be put on Java.net to enable for easier participation, as well as to
help prevent meat puppeting of votes since votes would be tied to
java.netmembership.
*Idea Futures Market / Prediction Market* To make the JSR process more lively, fun, insightful, and interesting, it might be useful to implement an Idea Futures Market / Prediction Market, where people can buy and sell shares of whether they think a JSR will end up with a Yes or No vote. This way, the JSR spec leads can have a sounding board of sorts and get an idea of whether a JSR should proceed forward as is, be thought through again, or killed without giving the opportunity for flame wars, and everyone .
This market could be hosted on java.net on the front page and run a modified version of Zocalo, an open source Java-based future prediction market.
Shares could be some sort of fake currency or it could be real money (maybe 1 cent or 10 cents per share) and the proceeds could go to fund Java-based open source projects (to avoid CFTC regulation) and the winner could pick the project their winnings go to once a market "settles" (the JSR is voted on). However, using real currency has the benefit of forcing participants to put their money where their values really are and discourage people from participating in JSRs they really don't care about or shouldn't be involved in. Whether real or fake currency is used, perhaps valuable prizes could be awarded, like free passes to JavaOne or free licenses to nice tools or hardware or something, or a store where Java branded stuff could be "purchased" and the user has to pay for the cost of shipping.
Both of these mechanisms would allow for and encourage genuine community input, and would encourage the Java community to become more engaged.
Again, feel free to chime in or give a +1 or -1 vote to either idea.
Thanks, Jim
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Frans Thamura <fra...@meruvian.org>wrote:
+1 for John's son in EC :)
-- Frans Thamura Director Meruvian. The Most Complete Java Services Provider in Indonesia
Mobile: +6287885901958 Blog & Profile: http://frans.thamura.info
We grow because we share the same belief.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:39 PM, John Yeary <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that the Hologic may be a consumer of Java technology. So is my son. Anyone who uses a browser for an applet, or web start for running an application is a consumer of the technology. In the same vein, we would not want to place my son on the Executive Committee (EC) to determine the course of JSRs and Java technologies. I am also a consumer of airlines. I feel under represented by them, but they are not going to put me in the cockpit because I fly on any particular one.
Normally, I try to stay clear of Oracle bashing because I find it counter productive. I would say that this is a bad decision because a consumer of the technology is not necessarily in the best position to lead it.
An example to make my point. As a consumer of medical technologies we can and have an expectation that the technologies either help us directly, or our doctors (who help us). I don't expect that Java developers are going to be reading x-rays, or mammograms anytime soon. Would they put us on the board of directors for Hologic because we consume their technologies? I image not. I am sure that I am under represented by them though, and my wife is a direct consumer of their mammogram technology.
We can not be all things to all people, and this is a case of that. The JCP and EC represent our domain in the same way that Hologic's domain is medical technology. Hologic would be better for a focus group to meet their needs, and not on the controlling body for Java standards.
John
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:05 AM, 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.
We hope this offers some clarity our views.
Jeb
-- John Yeary
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat." -- Theodore Roosevelt
-- John Yeary
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat." -- Theodore Roosevelt