"Maybe JBoss doesn't want an exclusively private list as one of the list options, but I know Sun does. I'll leave it for other EG members to respond" Where does this leave people like me? Lincoln Baxter III http://ocpsoft.com http://scrumshark.com Keep it simple. On Nov 13, 2009 4:08 PM, "Ed Burns" <Ed.Burns(a)sun.com&gt; wrote: said: DA> Now back to this question: *So what replaces JSR-314-OPEN then? * DA> There are two issues here: DA> 1. What happens to the current archives of JSR-314-OPEN? DA> 2. What list do we use in the future? DA> Unless there are any objections here, Max has agreed to import all DA> the archives from March 09 until now into the jsr-314-public forum DA> on Monday. This will make them immediately accessible to the public DA> and search engines. We have the option of closing the replies on DA> the threads. *I'm not sure what the right answer is there.* I'm fine with this migration and feel no need to close replies on the threads. DA> We can import the discussions into our list as well. Then, the two DA> lists will continue on their own paths. DA> That brings us to the second question, what is our list? DA> We certainly don't need both jsr-314-eg(a)jcp.org and DA> jsr-314-observers(a)jcp.org. I don't know about that, but I do know we need jsr-314-eg(a)jcp.org to be an EG private email list. Contractual discussions regarding licenses and other topics that vendors feel sensitive about discussing openly need a place to happen. jsr-314-eg(a)jcp.org has been and will continue to be that place. DA> And since we don't want a exclusively private list, that leaves us DA> with jsr-314-observers(a)jcp.org. Maybe JBoss doesn't want an exclusively private list as one of the list options, but I know Sun does. I'll leave it for other EG members to respond. DA> It's not ideal, but we could probably live with PMO manually adding DA> invited members to this list (to post). They claim that we are not DA> restricted in who we choose to invite, so at least the policy is DA> correct. DA> However, the showstopper for jsr-314-observers@jcp is that the DA> archives are not public for reading. DA> We can adopt jsr-314-observers(a)jcp.org as soon as there is a public DA> forum for it on jcp.org. I'd like to get this resolved ASAP so we DA> can get off this list. DA> That concludes my update. I suspect there will be plenty of DA> discussion to follow. In summary, here are the action items for Max: DA> 1. Posts to jsr-314-public(a)jcp.org should be sent out via e-mail. DA> 2. Posting via jsr-314-public(a)jcp.org needs to be fixed DA> 3. jsr-314-comments(a)jcp.org should be aliased to jsr-314-public(a)jcp.org DA> 4. archives for jsr-314-observers(a)jcp.org needs to be publically accesable DA> 5. JSR-314-OPEN archives should be imported into jsr-314-observers and DA> jsr-314-public Thanks for scratching your itch on this Dan. Your advocacy for open-ness fits in with the continuing push of JCP to be more open. Ed -- | ed.burns(a)sun.com | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640 | homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/

On 11/13/09 1:20 PM, Dan Allen wrote: Maybe. IANAL, but it's my understanding the JSPA has specific carve outs for things like discussions of possibly patentable technology, or (and I may be mistaken here) trade secrets. Just because we've never used it doesn't mean we won't - but the JSPA protections only apply to signatories (i.e., JCP members), so a private list is also required for that function (if desired). Please consult your local legal rottweilers for more information. And since I'm not a lawyer, everything I've said above may be wrong - don't make any business decisions based on this email. (This concludes the legal disclaimer portion of this email.) Jim

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 5:56 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: Sorry that I had spoken in haste. The private list was just not on my radar for solving the community participation problem. Of course we can use it...and we can even switch to it today since the current configuration for jsr-314-eg(a)jcp.org is suitable. We just need to verify the proper people are subscribed. -Dan -- Dan Allen Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action Registered Linux User #231597 http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen