EC Give JSRs Green Light

Quartet of JSRs Approved

Jessica Thornsby
Quartet-of-JSRs-Approved

JSRs 334, 335, 336 and 337 pass the EC vote.

Mark Reinhold has announced that the four recently proposed JSRs
(JSR 334, JSR 335, JSR 336 and JSR 337) have been approved by the Executive Committee, after the
committee requested a one-week extension of the voting period.
Stephen Colebourne has revealed that Apache,
Google and Tim Peierls voted against Java SE 7 and Java SE 8;
Apache voted against Project Coin and Project Lambda, while Tim
Peierls refused to vote on both accounts. What is particularly
revealing, are the comments written by the JCP members while
casting their ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote for Java SE 7. Tim Peierls wanted
to register his “extreme disappointment with Oracle’s failure to
address EC questions about the licensing terms of this (Java SE 7)
JSR.” He also indicates that, at one point, he was planning to
abstain from the Java SE 7 vote, but Oracle’s failure to clarify
issues with the licensing made him change his mind. This indicates
that Oracle declined to answer some questions posed by the EC. “My
interpretation is that Oracle no longer felt the need to justify
its actions,” concludes Stephen Colebourne.

Google too had a problem with the licensing terms, calling it
“wrong to condone the inclusion of field-of-use restrictions in a
TCK license,” although they did agree with the technical content of
the JSR. But, even those who voted in favour of the JSRs took the
opportunity to register their unhappiness with the licensing terms.
SAP wrote they were voting for the technical content, not the
licensing terms, and registered their disappointment “that Oracle
has decided to deny Apache a TCK license for Java 7.” IBM, Eclipse,
RedHat, VMWare, and Credit Suisse all made a distinction between
the technical merits, which they were in favour of, and the
licensing terms, which they disapproved of, as they voted ‘yes’ on
the JSR.

Stephen Colebourne is disappointed with the outcome, saying
“give a bully an inch and they will take a mile….Voting “Yes” to
it was simply cowardly.”

Apache voting against all the JSRs came as no surprise: the ASF
previously accused
Oracle
of “violating their contractual obligation as set forth
under the rules of the JCP by only offering a TCK license that
imposes additional terms and conditions that are not compatible
with open source or Free software licenses.” Therefore, the ASF no
longer viewed Oracle as “a member in good standing” and hinted they
would vote against the JSRs. The ASF encouraged other JCP members
to join them in voting against Oracle, and threatened to leave the
JCP if the vote passed. Despite Oracle
accusing the ASF
of encouraging stagnation of the Java platform
with their threats, the Foundation refused to back down, replying
with the
blunt statement
that “the ball is in your court. Honor the
agreement.”

The big question now is, will the ASF follow through with their
threat and leave the JCP?

Author
Comments
comments powered by Disqus