These are the final results of the JSR Review Ballot for JSR #312. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.
JSR312
StageJSR Review Ballot
Ballot durationMar 27, 2007 to Apr 9, 2007
Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation
BEA Systems
Borland Software Corporation
Fujitsu Limited
Google Inc.
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel Corp.
Lea, Doug
Nortel
Oracle
Red Hat
SAP SE
SAS Institute Inc.
Suleiman, Hani
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2007-03-30 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-04 Suleiman, Hani voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-08 Apache Software Foundation voted Yes with the following comment:
While we are happy to see that the the JSR notes that the TCK will be licensed without any field of use restrictions, we'd like to point out that is a requirement of the JSPA and is expected of every JSR. We also expect that TCK license terms will be made available for review before and with the final ballot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-02 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
We didn't ask as below on this one since the JSR says they don't use field of use restrictions.

The following describes a general procedure we employ as part of the determination of our vote.  Voting on a ballot does not imply that we can confirm licenses meet JCP licensing requirements.

While not required by the JCP Process, we think the best approach is to make at least one alternative for the required licenses publicly viewable so that the community knows what is required to implement a specification. 

If there is not an alternative in which all required licenses are publicly viewable, we intend to ask the Spec Lead for confirmation that at least one alternative "does not impose any contractual condition or covenant that would limit or restrict the right of any licensee to create or distribute such Independent Implementations" other than the compatibility and reciprocity conditions described in the JSPA.  In particular, we intend to ask for confirmation that at least one alternative does not limit field of use of a compatible implementation (e.g. prohibit or charge royalties for distributing for use on particular operating systems or particular devices or for use in particular environments).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-02 Borland Software Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-04 Nortel voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-04 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-04 Red Hat voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-05 SAS Institute Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 SAP SE voted Abstain with the following comment:
The scope of this JSR seems to be very broad. It would be useful to narrow down the scope and concentrate only on key areas such as alignment with SCA. We are concerned about sending mixed and confusing messages to our partners and customers by promoting development of multiple solutions (such as SCA and JBI 2.0) with overlapping problem statements (e.g. composite application development, policy). In order to avoid any potential conflicts and confusions, we prefer that a clear alignment and a common roadmap for SCA and JBI 2.0 is identified before an effort for JBI 2.0 is undertaken.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 IBM voted No with the following comment:
IBM believes that SCA is the best technical approach for standardizing the component architecture for composite applications in SOA, and that SOA is the best technical approach to enable the composition of our customers' heterogeneous systems built from different languages and multiple containers, and that utilize multiple access technologies.  

This JSR indicates SCA is just one of many ways of doing composite applications with JBI v2. Having these multiple options will continue to confuse our customers and the general marketplace.

IBM believes that other objectives contained in the proposed JSR run contrary to the SOA fundamental goals of enabling composition across heterogeneous systems, by seeking to bind language-neutral concerns - such as component coordination across distributed systems - too tightly to a Java-centric model, and by restricting choice in SOA infrastructure configuration.

These concerns, coupled with the belief that the intended changes to JBI would further encroach upon technical aspects which are already adequately specified in the EE environment, leads us to conclude that we cannot support the formation of the JSR.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 BEA Systems voted No with the following comment:
BEA remains unconvinced of the value of a Java-only solution for SOA. While JBI 1.0 targetted the integration of middleware components it was marketed as a application-level solution causing our customers to be very confused. Now that we have a real application level solution on the horizon with SCA, a new JBI can only be viewed as a competitive alternative, especially after reading the list of objectives.

BEA believes that the Java community will be better served with a multi-platform, multi-language SOA standard like SCA than anything that can be developed solely fo Java so would prefer that a new JBI expert group NOT be formed.  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 Oracle voted Abstain with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 Hewlett-Packard voted Abstain with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-09 Fujitsu Limited voted Abstain with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------