Max (and the JCP PMO), I want to start by saying that we appreciate your thorough response and your willingness to address our requests. I'm confident that our work together with have a positive and lasting influence on the JCP community. I've provided feedback and clarification inline. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Max Lanfranconi <Max.Lanfranconi(a)sun.com&gt;wrote: > Please be aware that making the jsr-314-observers board visible to > the public > is a customization of the code that needs to be implemented. > It would help us if we understood why it is necessary to customize the off-the-shelf software to make the observers boards public. I'm not questioning the need, but rather trying to understand why the observers boards are different than the public boards, which are public facing already. If we understood better what the problem is, I think we would have an easier time remaining patient. > > Also, as discussed with Roger, we are waiting on a couple of really > critical > fixes to the code that we are using for the boards that prevent us to > release the > features you are looking forward to. > Such fixes are being implemented outside Sun, and, as much as we would > like > to have them now, they are going to take some time to be developed, > tested and implemented. > Understood. > > So, here is a summary of what we will do: > > We will import the current subscribers from jsr-314-open into > jsr-314-observers. > Great! > > The mailing list jsr-314-open will go away. > > Subscribers to jsr-314-observers will be able to both read and write > to the board/alias. > This doesn't add any restrictions to what we currently have with jsr-314-open, so we are willing to migrate immediately based on the information you have provided. (Note that we are still seeking public read access, but that was never possible with jsr-314-open, so by migrating we can pursue this need) > Other users who are NOT subscribed will be able to read the > > jsr-314-observers archives in the discussion board > I'm assuming you mean "not subscribed, but signed in jcp.org members". I just want to clarify the current state. > > Users may request to become subscribers by filling out the existing > form to join the jsr-314-observers board; Ed and/or Roger would then be > able to review the nomination and approve/decline the request using the > existing form. > That's fine in the short term. In the long run, I don't see why we need a human task in the subscription process. That will burden Ed and Roger and slow down the subscription. I'd like to request that the process be completely automated. > > Note: the list of boards on jcp.org is browsable by logged-in users, but > there are publicly-readable boards that anyone can read, though they > can't see the navigation if they don't log in. So, a question about read > permissions: do you want the list readable by registered users of > jcp.org, who will have handy navigation to find the jsr-314-observers > board, or do you want anyone with an internet connection to be able to > read it, with the idea that you would send out a direct link to the world? > First of all, one of my major complaints with jcp.org right now is that the list of boards is not visible at first view. I don't understand why the complete list can't be displayed (obviously, the jsr-xxx-eg boards can be hidden). When I first arrived at the boards page, I thought that there were only a handful of boards. Later I realized there are a lot more, just hidden. So yes, we want the complete board list to be visible. There is no reason to hide the names of any of the boards (with the exception of the jsr-xxx-eg boards). We also want a search engine, such as Google, to be able to navigate to the threads in the jsr-314-observers forum so that they can be indexed. That means they should be visible by an anonymous visitor. > Once again, just so that there will be no misunderstanding, I am restating > the current status next to each of your requests marking it with ****: > 1) Make jsr-xxx-observers readable by the world and writable by anyone > w/ post access to jsr-314-open > ****Waiting of third party developers**** > Your saying we can't even migrate without critical fixes? We really want to migrate as soon as possible, so anything that can be done to speed this up would be great. > 2) Import the archives of jsr-314-open into jsr-314-observers > > ****Waiting on third party developers**** > Again, I'm wondering which fixes we need to at least do the migration.

Just to clarify this point, we also need to jsr-314-open archives (the messages dating back to March 09) imported into jsr-314-observers. The EG would like to review the result of the import (i.e., how the messages appear in the board) before we commit to switching over to the new mailinglist.

> 3) Messages sent to jsr-314-public(a)jcp.org > > <mailto:jsr-314-public@jcp.org> are still not ending up on the forum > unless the sender is on the JSR-314 EG; anyone should be allowed to post > through that email address > ****The problem is somewhat different of what it seems: > registered users ARE able to use the jsr-314-public board, but that it > takes a > while after registration for those permission to propogate to all systems > (similar > to what happens about making Expert Group edits). This will be fixed in > the > future but it is basically a "feature, not a bug"TM for now **** > Okay, as long as we can document how long it will take as an upper bound, at least the community will know that they have to be patient. Is it 1 hour? 12 hours? 24 hours? 48 hours? You should strongly consider documenting this on jcp.org in a prominent place, because otherwise the community is going to assume the software is broken. I can live with a propagation delay, as long as we can set the expectation. > > Also, while you are reading this, is there anyway to reverse the order > that posts appear on the forum? Currently, the new posts in a thread > show up first and the oldest last. That is totally upside down from how > 95% of the forums on the web work. > ****We are discussing this with the forum's developers. > It should be doable but has much lower priority compared with everything > else they are working on right now so it might take quite some time > before this > will be addressed. **** > Understood. One other thing I noticed recently (sorry to keep adding things, but this is really important to get this right). I'm strongly against the wiki syntax in the boards. When we import our messages, it is going to produce all kinds of strange links and other markup that we don't want. When people post to a mailinglist, they expect it to be interpreted as plain text. We absolutely need to get rid of the wiki syntax in the boards. > > Rest assured that your needs are very high on our priority list. As soon > as we > receive the fixes from the third party developers we will test them, > deploy them > and let you know. > A sincere thanks. > > Unfortunately we are not able to provide a firm date yet, but we will let > you > know as soon as possible. > Please don't hesitate to send an update, even if it is brief. > > Please let me know if there is any further concern that I did not cover. > Another very quick, yet important change request. The text on jcp.org is very, very difficult to read, especially for people that don't have strong eyesight (I am lucky in that regard, but I must keep the general population in mind). The problem is that the text is too light! It needs to be darked to at least #333333 (about 80% black). Most news sites adhere to this convention for the vision impaired. Thanks again. I'm very glad to have established a good working relationship with your team. Our streamlined collaboration is what's best for the JCP community! -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