Meeting to reach a conclusion (resend)

[David M. Lloyd]

I'm open to this idea.  I would like to continue to publish proposals on 
this list until such a meeting can take place though.  It might serve as 
a good foundation for discussion at the very least.

Some of the EG might be at DevoxxUK tomorrow and/or Wednesday (I'm not, 
but other Red Hat folks are/will be).  That might be a good 
(preliminary?) opportunity to meet face to face, at least for some 
subset of the EG.

On 05/10/2017 02:43 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
> I don't see my first attempt to send this email in the list archive, so re-sending...
> 
> 
>     me --- Meeting to reach a conclusion ---
>      From:"Tim Ellison" <Tim_Ellison at uk.ibm.com>To:jpms-spec-experts at openjdk.java.netDate:Wed, 10 May 2017 15:54Subject:Meeting to reach a conclusion
>    
>     
>       I'm mindful that the clock is now running under the JCP process [1] for us to submit a revised specification for reconsideration.
>     
>        
>     
>       Mark has said there is no business pressure to hit the JDK9 schedule dates, however, we should aim to square away remaining issues as quickly as possible and submit a reconsideration.  We don't have to use the full 30-days afforded, and should work to ensure the spec delivery stays on track.
>     
>        
>     
>       I think it would be useful to increase the bandwidth of EG communication during this period.  The mailing list conversation to date has been "bursty", and at times open to misinterpretation.  So I propose we try and find some time within the next two weeks where the EG can gather around a whiteboard and talk.  Ideally this would be face-to-face if we can find a suitable time and place, because I think we'd make much more progress in one or two days of focused conversation.  If not a physical meeting we can fall back to conference call, video call, etc.
>     
>        
>     
>       Of course, all decisions and conclusions in such a meeting would be brought back to this mailing list for openness and posterity, with a suitable period for observers to comment before re-submission.
>     
>        
>     
>       Are people open to such a suggestion?
>     
>        
>     
>       [1] https://www.jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#3.4.5
>     
>        
>     
>       Regards,
>     
>       TimUnless 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
> 


-- 
- DML