OpenJDK Governing Board Minutes: 20011/4/21

Mark Wielaard mark at
Fri May 6 13:19:16 UTC 2011

Hi Doug,

On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 08:53 -0400, Doug Lea wrote:
> Part of this best-effort is trying to expedite adoption of
> bylaws and revised contributor agreements, as well as encouraging
> creation of per-project process documents, infrastructure
> improvements and so on. It is inevitable that all of these
> will cause a few minor transient snags. But also inevitable that
> they will result in a better OpenJDK.

I am happy you keep optimistic and communicating. Communication was
actually one of the five points that I felt was most important to solve
first before tweaking other things in the governance structure of the
project. So thanks and full marks for that.

> If "transient" turns out to be more than a matter of, say, a month,
> then it can only be because there are some deeper problems. If that
> is the case, the decision will surely be revisited in light of those
> deeper problems.

But I think part of the frustration is that it is completely unclear
what this holdup actually is about. Is this really about fixing those
things that really are at the core of the the unfairness some feel
between Oracle and IBM versus the rest of the community, or is this just
about tweaking things in the margin without correcting the actual
imbalance people see and feel?

Personally I would have a lot more patience and would be slightly less
"paranoid" if you could just tell us whether or not you are addressing
some of the actionable items listed in some of the pervious discussion.
e.g. here:

If we get the feeling that at least the core issues are being addressed
then I think you will see a lot more understanding about the current
position of the board.



More information about the discuss mailing list