[modules-discuss] questions on status

[Stanley M. Ho]

Hi Steve,

I have been on family leave on and off in the last few weeks, and I 
apologize that this reply took much longer than I would like.

> Stephen J. McConnell wrote:
>> To the 277 community at large:
>>
>> Some questions on status:
>>
>>   (a) The comments below reference a pending strawman document, 
>>       however, about 5 months ago another strawman document was 
>>       referenced (the service and service provider support 
>>       document) but that document was restricted to EG members
>>       pending Sanley Ho's resolution of JCP rules via a request for 
>>       clarification to the JCP PMO.  I would like to know if 
>>       the JCP PMO raised any issues that would prevent publication, 
>>       and if so, what those issues were?  

Although the code is developed on OpenJDK under GPL, the spec (including 
the strawman) is developed in the JCP under a different license. To 
release this strawman to the public, it will come with a license. It can 
either be made available on the JSR community page on jcp.org, or on 
openjdk.java.net. However, the former would mean that the strawman is 
only accessible by JCP members because it will require login, and I 
don't think this is what we want. Alternatively, in the latter case, the 
strawman will require a click-through license mechanism in place. This 
is the option I am leaning towards, and we've been waiting for the 
mechanism to be ready.

>>   (b) Will the interoperability strawman be subject to the same 
>>       closed review process or can we expect imminent publication
>>       without legal constraint?

The interoperability strawman will be subjected to the same process.

>>   (c) Have any actions been taken to eliminate the requirement 
>>       for people interested in JSR 277 to accept the license 
>>       constraints associated with the initial draft specification 
>>       document (this has been and remains an issue in terms of 
>>       engaging a broader FOSS community in the evaluation of the 
>>       277 work)?  In particular - can be look forward to the 
>>       publication of the second edition of the draft specification
>>       under the GPL?

This is the way things have been so far. Onno Kluyt in JCP PMO has 
recently started a new round of discussion on this with our fine legal 
minds, and the discussion is ongoing. It is unlikely that there will be 
changes in this aspect in the second EDR, but I can't say for sure for 
future editions of the spec down the road.

>>   (d) Is anyone on the 277 EG working with the IcedTea project 
>>       to establish an installable modules prototype?  In my opinion
>>       a working distribution of the modules system would be very
>>       valuable and generate a greater level of community 
>>       involvement.

We're not aware any EG member working with IcedTea at this point. That 
said, we hope the community would involve and start the effort if this 
is important to the community. That's the purpose of open source after all!

- Stanley