What I find most astonishing on this thread is that apparently neither the Governance Board members nor a Sun representative have considered it important enough to comment or respond. Strange...
On 1/16/09, Andrew Haley <[email protected]> wrote: > Neal Gafter wrote: > > >> On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 19:15 -0800, Neal Gafter wrote: > > >>> The OpenJDK governing board, having had its life extended by a > >>> year, is now scheduled to dissolve in four months, with two of its > >>> non-Sun positions remaining unfilled. The last published meeting > >>> minutes were from April 2008, at which it was agreed that the GB > >>> would strive for a draft Constitution by the end of 2008. > > >>> Who are the seven members of the governing board? Can we please > >>> see the minutes of meetings after April, and get a status report > >>> on the Constitution? > > > > The reason I ask is that I'm worried that openJDK may turn into the > > defacto mechanism for features getting into the platform. The JCP > > used to play that role, but there has been little activity in > > forming a JSR for Java SE 7 in the past few years. I've noticed > > that openjdk7 is more and more being called Java 7, JDK7, etc, even > > though it doesn't implement a platform specification approved by the > > JCP. If openjdk is to become the mechanism by which features are > > added to the platform, > > > I don't see how that can happen. For Java SE 7 to be released there > must be a platform specification, and there must be a TCK. openjdk7 > is a bunch of packages slated for Java SE 7 that may or may not get to > be in the platform. > > > > it would be better for the governance model to acknowledge and support > that. > > > It would, yes, but it would be a huge change. > > In the past there have undoubtedly been developments very much like > the openjdk7 tree, where platform integration has proceeded prior to > the formal platform specification. This is essential: you need to > make sure that a design works in a reasonable way before its > specification is finalized. The only difference now is that the > openjdk7 tree is open. > > > Andrew. >
