These are the final results of the Public Review Ballot for JSR #317. The Executive Committee for SE/EE has approved this ballot.
JSR317
StagePublic Review Ballot
Ballot durationDec 9, 2008 to Dec 15, 2008
Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation
Eclipse Foundation, Inc
Ericsson AB
Fujitsu Limited
Google Inc.
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel Corp.
Keil, Werner
Lea, Doug
Nortel
Oracle
Red Hat
SAP SE
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
VMware
Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2008-12-09 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
The Apache Foundation claimed they are not being offered a Java SE TCK License that meets the JCP requirements to license the TCK.  They claim the license offered restricts field of use for compatible implementations.  http://www.apache.org/jcp/sunopenletter.html   Since these licenses are confidential, it is not clear whether Independent Implementers can obtain a Java SE TCK License that does not restrict how compatible implementation can be used.  (JSPA says "Other than as set forth above, the Spec Lead agrees not to impose any contractual condition or covenant that would limit or restrict the right of any licensee to create or distribute such Independent Implementations").  

Java EE requires Java SE.  If the Java EE TCK requires the EE implementation is run on an SE that passes the SE TCK (another license from the same Spec Lead) and if the SE TCK restricts field of use then the EE TCK also restricts field of use.  But since the licenses are confidential, again we do not know.

By the time EE 6 JSRs come to Final Ballot, we expect a statement that the EE 6 TCK license does not restrict field of use and does not require any other licenses like the SE TCK license that restricts field of use.  

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-09 Apache Software Foundation voted No with the following comment:
The Apache Software Foundation's vote is based on the point of view that this spec lead - Sun - is in violation of the JSPA 

http://www.apache.org/jcp/sunopenletter.html

and therefore shouldn't be allowed to start another JSR until the above matter is resolved. 

This vote is not a comment on the technical merits of the JSR.  If not for the issue of the spec lead, the ASF would have otherwise voted "yes".

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-09 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-10 Red Hat voted Yes with the following comment:
The spec lead of the EE6 specification has confirmed that the EE6 TCK would contain no "field of use restrictions", as originally raised by Apache with regard to another JSR (i.e. the SE TCK licensing). That is a good thing.

However, in the absence of an explicit JSPA rule that would forbid such field-of-use restrictions, we will remain worried that a similar issue might resurface anytime, for any JSR.

Consequently, in the future, for any submitted JSR (by SUNW or not), we will specifically expect the spec lead to provide clear information on that aspect and take the answer in account when casting our vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-10 Oracle voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-10 Keil, Werner voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-11 Ericsson AB voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-11 VMware voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-12 SAP SE voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-15 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the licensing terms.  IBM supports licensing models that create an open and level playing field by allowing third parties to create independent implementations of Java Specifications and that do not allow individuals or companies to exercise unnecessary control for proprietary advantage.  We support open source as a licensing model for contributions in the JCP, and would hope others will support this direction. This comment is not necessarily directed at the current business or license terms for this JSR, however, it is a statement of IBM's preferred licensing model.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-15 Google Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-15 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-15 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------