Project proposal: fbtoolkit

Mark Reinhold mr at
Thu May 24 05:12:39 UTC 2007

> Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 21:25:52 -0700
> From: phil.race at

> Tom Marble wrote:
>> Please note that following the Projects guidelines followups are
>> intended to go to the discuss list [1].
> Thats a broken process. It should go to affected groups.

A Project does not necessarily need group sponsorship, which is why the
interim project-proposal process doesn't define a notion of "affected

If the proposer of a new Project does know of one or more groups that are
potential sponsors then it'd likely be more efficient to poll those
groups for support before proposing the new Project, but doing so is not

> Any assumption that every one reads or even knows about 'discuss'  is
> wrong and for ever will be.

That's why project proposals are posted to the announce list, with
follow-ups to the discuss list.

Tom did in fact cc the AWT and Swing lists, though in retrospect he
probably should've cc'd the 2D list as well.

> So does it really  make sense to propose a project you think is a cool
> idea you don't understand and then disappear?
> I think proposals should come only from someone who is committed to the
> idea and will work on it.

It would be helpful to hear answers to Phil's technical questions, either
from Tom, from Steph, or from someone else who intends to work on this

>> Allow me to clarify, as well, that the purpose of this project
>> is experimental and for prototyping.  ...
>> Can we get a Group sponsor?
> I don't think we have a clue what sponsorship means.  It certainly
> can't mean in this case any work from Sun engineers ( wish we had time
> for such ideas ourselves), or taking it back into openjdk in any time
> in the forseeable future.

In the interim governance guidelines, sponsorship means only that the
majority of the members of a Group think that the project is worthwhile.
It does not imply any kind of commitment of effort, nor does it imply
that the code will one day be integrated into any particular JDK tree.
(I'll clarify this in the guidelines.)

> It just seems like an  interesting expt  this time, with  unproven
> practical applications.

Personally I think that the OpenJDK Community should be open to all kinds
of interesting experiments.  That's often, after all, the best way to
learn things.

- Mark

More information about the discuss mailing list