The Java Community Process(SM) Program - JSRs: Java Specification Requests

More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

Use of JCP site is subject to the JCP Terms of Use and the Oracle Privacy Policy

JSR #315
Java^TM Servlet 3.0 Specification
Public Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2009-01-06 to: 2009-01-12

These are the final results of the Public Review Ballot for JSR #315. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.

Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation

Eclipse Foundation, Inc

Ericsson AB

Fujitsu Limited

Google Inc.

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Intel Corp.

Keil, Werner

Lea, Doug

Nortel

Oracle

Red Hat

SAP SE

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

VMware

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2009-01-07 Red Hat voted Yes with the following comment:
The spec lead of the EE6 specification has confirmed that the EE6 TCK would contain no "field of use restrictions", as originally raised by Apache with regard to another JSR (i.e. the SE TCK licensing). That is a good thing.

However, in the absence of an explicit JSPA rule that would forbid such field-of-use restrictions, we will remain worried that a similar issue might resurface anytime, for any JSR.

Consequently, in the future, for any submitted JSR (by SUNW or not), we will specifically expect the spec lead to provide clear information on that aspect and take the answer in account when casting our vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-07 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-08 SAP SE voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-08 Ericsson AB voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-09 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's participant is working with the EG to address technical concerns which we anticipate will be closed prior to the Final Draft 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 2009-01-09 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
This is a general comment we make in each ballot.  By the agreement that forms the JCP, other than reciprocity rules for licensing and three compatibility conditions (including passing the TCK test suite) "the Spec Lead agrees not to impose any contractual condition or covenant that would limit or restrict the right of any licensee to create or distribute such Independent Implementations."  The Apache Foundation claims in an open letter that they have been unable to obtain a TCK License that does not restrict compatible implementations of the SE Platform (additional restrictions that are not in the  specification itself ).    

Java EE requires Java SE.  If the Java EE TCK License requires use of an SE implementation that passes the SE TCK and if the SE TCK License restricts field of use then the EE TCK License would also be restricting field of use through the SE TCK License.  Since the licenses are confidential, we do not know.

By the time EE 6 JSRs come to Final Ballot, we expect a statement that the EE 6 TCK License does not restrict field of use, does not require implementing anything other than what is required in the spec itself (no "value add" preventing implementation of just the spec) and does not require any other license that restricts field of use of JCP Specs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-10 Eclipse Foundation, Inc voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 Oracle voted Yes with the following comment:
Oracle is voting YES with the following caveat: the EG is still working on a few issues that we want to see in the spec.  Our  understanding from the spec leads is that these issues will be resolved by the proposed final draft.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 VMware voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-12 Apache Software Foundation voted No with the following comment:
The Apache Software Foundation's vote is based on the point of view that this spec lead - Sun - is in violation of the JSPA 

http://www.apache.org/jcp/sunopenletter.html

and therefore shouldn't be allowed to start or continue another JSR until the above matter is resolved. 

This vote is not a comment on the technical merits of the JSR.  If not for the issue of the spec lead, the ASF would have otherwise voted "yes".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------