JSR-347 leadership

[Mircea Markus]

Hi guys,

Just a heads up, I'm no longer working for Red Hat and won't be leading this JSR. 

Cheers,

Mircea

[Alex Snaps]

Good luck with whatever you're up to next... 

Do we expect Red Hat to step up on this though? 

Thanks & again best of luck to you,

Alex

[Tristan Tarrant]

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be enough commitment to help move this JSR forward so our recommendation is to abandon it.

Tristan

[ben cotton]

Sorry, Tristan. but this reasoning seems like a classic case of "post hoc, ergo, propter hoc" ...  a most offensive logical fallicy  ... I would encourage RedHat to respect the many merits Manik, Mircea (and this community) had for efforting 347 and consider coming up with an alternative 347 JSR abandonment rationale.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JSR 347 discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jsr347+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Tristan Tarrant]

Offensive ? I don't think so, I'm just being realistic: there has been little activity and barely any visible commitment.
But I'm willing to hear what the rest of the EG has to say.

Tristan

[Ben Cotton]

Certainly not personally offensive... Rather ... More logically offensive.  I mean would it be JCP mutiny just to say 'Manik or Mircea... Would either of you have an interest in being spec-lead ... Independent of fact that you're now no longer RedHat direct employee?'

Sent from my iPhone

[Joseph Ottinger]

Why would Red Hat employment be a factor here? (What am I missing?) It's not Red Hat's JSR; RHT employees had a hand in it, but I was originally participating apart from RHT, certainly (and my personal membership ceased *because* of Red Hat employment.)

Joseph B. Ottinger
http://www.enigmastation.com

Memento mori.

[Pete Muir]

Hi Joe,

Purely on a procedural point, I can probably clear up your point below. I’m definitely not representing Red Hat here ;-)

The JCP is a bit weird about membership. You can either be a individual member, or you can be a organisational member. You can’t be both. As a result, if you join an organisation that is a member, you have to participate in JSRs as a representative of the organisation.

A JSR is lead by a particular member, and in this case the member that leads JSR-347 is Red Hat, and not the people who work for Red Hat. As a result, therefore it kinda “is Red Hat’s JSR”.

Like I say above, I’m not saying that Red Hat would, or wouldn’t, be happy to have someone else lead it, just what the procedural situation is.

FWIW, I personally think this whole organisational/individual member split is really counterproductive for driving the Java platform forward…

Pete

[Joseph Ottinger]

Ahhhh, I see what you mean. Well, we tried to kick it into motion a while back but had no real movement... is there still a need?

[Manik Surtani]

Pete beat me to it, but I hope it clarifies why Mircea or myself cannot continue to lead this spec.

[Mircea Markus]

Thanks for the credit, Ben.

I'm happy to participate in the group as an expert, but leading the JSR is not something I would have time to do given my current engagements. 

I also think that Tristan's point re: participation is valid, and having more players as part of the JSR is important to get industry acceptance. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "JSR 347 discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jsr347/kMcJYBGk574/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to jsr347+un...@googlegroups.com.