Concerns with JPMS spec and Jigsaw implementation

[Tim Ellison]

mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote on 27/04/2017 21:02:09:
> 2017/4/14 20:18:03 -0700, Scott Stark <sstark at redhat.com>:
> > Via our participation in JSR 376/JPMS we have raised a number of 
concerns
> > regarding the implementation decision in Jigsaw as well as the scope 
and
> > consensus of the expert group efforts. We, along with other EC 
members, and
> > EG members have compiled a document that details these concerns. These
> > concerns are outlined in the following blog:
> > https://developer.jboss.org/blogs/scott.stark/2017/04/14/critical-
> 
deficiencies-in-jigsawjsr-376-java-platform-module-system-ec-member-concerns
> 
> This document does not raise any substantive technical issues that have 
not
> already been discussed in the JSR 376 EG.

I believe that document demonstrates there is still work required to bring 
the
community closer to an agreement on the proposed standard.

Even where the technical issues have already been discussed in the EG, it 
is
incumbent upon this group to make best efforts to understand and resolve 
any
differences.  If people feel that their argument has not been considered, 
then
it is not surprising that frustration ensues.

I am personally disappointed that the move to call the Public Review 
ballot
was made despite explicit objection from a number of EG members.

> > As it stands, Red Hat will not vote for the approval of this public 
review
> > draft of JPMS as it is not in the best interest of the Java community.
> 
> Acknowledged.

IBM is also voting "no" which reflects our position that the JSR is not 
ready at
this time to move beyond the Public Review stage and proceed to Proposed 
Final
Draft.

The JSR 376 Expert Group and the public have raised a number of reasonable 
issues
and concerns with the current public review draft of the specification 
that
warrant further discussion and resolution.  We advocate work continuing 
amongst
all members of the Expert Group to address the issues documented on the 
mailing
lists.

IBM would like to see closer consensus amongst the entire Expert Group 
before
this specification proceeds to the next step.

Regards,
Tim


Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU