Use Advanced Search to search the entire archive.
[jsr363-experts] Re: Specification not ready for a release today
- From: Werner Keil <
>
- To: "
" <
>
- Subject: [jsr363-experts] Re: Specification not ready for a release today
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:56:47 +0100
But the spec already does that:
>
Many contributions came from JSR 275 [JSR-275] and JSR 108 [JSR-108],
earlier JCP approaches to Units of Measurement in Java.
Aside from that we could follow JSR 354's pattern with a chapter like this:
1.1 Expert group
This work is being conducted as part of JSR 354 under the Java Community
Process Program.
This specification is the result of the collaborative work of the members
of the JSR 354 Expert Group and the community at large.
The following persons have actively contributed to JavaMoney in
alphabetical order:
...
Werner
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Leonardo Lima
<
>
wrote:
>
>
Werner,
>
>
I proposed that we specifically say JSR275 (which was a upcoming standard
>
and as such had the right IP flow, I assume), Martin and Otavio (who are
>
the active EG in the mailing list, other than the Spec Leads) in an
>
Acknowledgement session in the JSR.
>
>
I didn't understand from your email. Do you see a problem with this? [Y/N]
>
:)
>
>
>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Werner Keil
>
<
>
>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Actually for 354 I also helped the Spec a bit, other than that Anatole
>
> did a lot of the work.
>
> Everyone in the EG is developer and editor, and therefore gets credit
>
> simply on https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=363 already.
>
> The POMs also make a difference between "developers" which in this case
>
> mean EG Members and "contributors" which can be supporters of the JSR.
>
>
>
> Until JSR 364 is final offering other forms of participation e.g. as
>
> "contributor" (which the POM could probably reflect just like that) it
>
> means only EG Members can officially contribute to the JSR, but that is
>
> documented on the JCP page, I know a few JSRs that put the list into
>
> JavaDoc (e.g. MEEP 8) and we could copy the list of EG Members into the
>
> spec, too if we want.
>
>
>
> People outside the EG especially "prior contributions" would be tricky
>
> and problematic from an IP point of view. We're not allowed to take any
>
> random piece of code or advice into a Java standard.
>
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Werner
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Martin Desruisseaux <
>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
>>
>
>> I stop for now (it is 3:20 AM on my side). Still have lot of open
>
>> issues, but hopefully should now be closer to the current API, have less
>
>> invalid statements, and more formatting.
>
>>
>
>> Still, given the large amount of work by non-spec leaders (including
>
>> work inherited from JSR-275), would be nice if some sort of
>
>> acknowledgement were written somewhere in the document. I guess that in
>
>> other JSR the spec leader usually act as editors. In this case the
>
>> editor work has been largely done by non-spec leaders.
>
>>
>
>> Martin
>
>>
>
>>