Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Your opportunity to express conce

[Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The Eclipse Architecture Council is one of the (potential) sources of 
input.

Mike does most of the voting (I usually only vote when there's some 
logistical restriction that prevents him from voting). Neither of us 
blindly vote any default on anything. No input from the AC means that we 
have to sort out the right answer exclusively by other means. 
Fortunately, we both have solid technical backgrounds and other sources 
of feedback.

Wayne


On 13/04/17 10:52 AM, Billings, Jay Jay wrote:
> Wayne,
>
> I think it is still useful and I believe you would get a lot of feedback from the group if any JSR was particularly bad. Personally I have been assuming that you are voting yes by default unless we complain?
>
> Jay
>
> Jay Jay Billings
> Team Lead, Scientific Software Development
> Oak Ridge National Laboratory
> Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
>
> ________________________________________
> From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 9:56 AM
> To: eclipse.org-architecture-council
> Subject: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Your opportunity to express concerns regarding some JSRs that are up for a vote
>
> Greetings Eclipse Architecture Council.
>
> As a member of the Java Community Process Executive Committee, the
> Eclipse Foundation is obligated to vote on JSRs. This is, basically, our
> opportunity to influence how various aspects of Java evolve.
>
> When a vote is announced, I post on this group because we value your
> input. Several years ago, we collectively decided that this was a good
> use of the Eclipse Architecture Council. I have, however, received
> virtually no feedback on these requests. When I've asked about this in
> the past, the consensus seemed to be that it was still
> useful/interesting to let the AC know that these votes were happening
> and that the group as a whole figured that I should continue to ask for
> their feedback. Is this still true?
>
> Below are the JSRs that are up for a vote. If you have any comments or
> feedback, please let me know ASAP.
>
> Note that I've already voted yes on JSR 221.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wayne
>
> *****NEW ITEMS*****
> JSR 67 - Java APIs for XML Messaging - Maintenance Review 5
> Last day to vote: 24 April 2017
> URL for Maintenance Review 5 materials:
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/maintenance/jsr067/index5.html
>
> JSR 224 - JAX-WS 2 - Maintenance Review 6
> Last day to vote: 24 April 2017
> URL for Maintenance Review 6 materials:
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/maintenance/jsr224/index6.html
>
>
> *****EXISTING ITEM*****
> JSR 221 - JDBC 4 API Specification - Maintenance Review 3
> Last day to vote: 17 April 2017
> URL for Maintenance Review 3 materials:
> https://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/maintenance/jsr221/index3.html
>
>
> --
> Wayne Beaton
> @waynebeaton
> The Eclipse Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
> eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
>
> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
> eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
>
> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation