[jsr294-modularity-eg] Runtime model

[Glyn Normington]

Perhaps Andreas and Alex are currently too busy, but can we agree that the 
Expert Group will have a serious discussion of Bryan's runtime model by, 
say, the middle of July, as I think it has some very useful properties and 
I would hate it to be dismissed lightly. I really don't want JSR 294 to be 
dogged with the "Not Invented Here" criticism like JSR 277.

A telecon or face to face meeting may help: England is lovely this time of 
year. ;-)

Glyn

Bryan Atsatt <bryan.atsatt at oracle.com> wrote on 08/06/2007 02:50:35 AM:

> Andreas Sterbenz wrote:
> > Bryan Atsatt wrote:
> >>> Of course it is a collaborative process.
> >> If so, is it unreasonable of me to expect a response to the model I 
> >> described?
> > 
> > I responded to the parts that I saw issue with. For the rest I did not 

> > have major comments, so it did not seem necessary to respond one by 
one. 
> > Silence does not imply disapproval. 
> 
> But, Andreas, you were not silent. You explicitly cut off discussion 
> about my comments, bluntly saying:
> 
> "We have not really gotten to details of the reflective API yet. Alex 
> and I will send out a proposal soon."
> 
> I was simply trying to begin a discussion about the runtime/APIs. You 
> squashed that, in a very offensive manner.
> 
> > It is easier for me (and I assume the rest of the EG) to evaluate a 
> > proposal if its ideas are fully formulated and no major areas are left 

> > blank. I don't think that is an unreasonable bar for proposals to the 
EG 
> > to meet, whoever they come from.
> 
> It may not be unreasonable to you, but it is to me. Your idea of how to 
> run a "collaborative" effort appears to eliminate working *together* to 
> reach a design. You know, where everyone contributes ideas, discusses 
> them and tries to reach a shared view? Where the spec lead(s) guide and 
> drive that process, forcing decisions only when required?
> 
> > Also, Sun's responsibilities as spec lead include producing a 
> > specification, a reference implementation, and a TCK. If we don't 
> > understand a proposal to sufficiently to produce them, we cannot 
accept 
> > it. That means if you make a proposal all of your own, you must commit 
to 
> > working with us to get it into a shape from which we can take it the 
rest 
> > of the way. Rights and responsibilities.
> 
> Sorry, again, I truly don't understand your view of the collaboration 
> process. So either EG members produce a "full" proposal, "all of our 
> own", and "commit to working with Sun", or... what? We don't get to 
> contribute ideas?
> 
> The model you appear to be working from has the EG in the role of 
> reviewers only. If that is all you want, why not just say so?
> 
> // Bryan
> _______________________________________________
> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg






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





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20070608/6b9fe0a8/attachment.html