jsr348
  1. jsr348
  2. JSR348-120

Should the JSR Review period always be four weeks, or 2-4 weeks at the option of the submitter?

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: Process Doc
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Version 2.7 defined the JSR Review period as 2-4 weeks. Our current draft specifies 4 weeks. Was this deliberate?

      Bill Shannon thinks 4 weeks is too long. I think it's barely long enough, and that we certainly shouldn't be launching new JSRs with only a two-week review period. (In practice we seem to get zero input from the community before JSRs are voted on. This seems wrong to me, and we should try to fix it in future.)

        Activity

        Hide
        eduardo added a comment -

        I am closing this issue based on Patrick's comment of 30/Sep/11 05:20 AM – it can of course be reopened it dissatisfaction with its resolution continued, but if it is I would suggest that if the intention is to merge review and ballot into one, then we should just drop the concept of review, which in most contexts implies study, consideration and decision making, and just have a (2 week?) ballot period. Review and ballot at the same time makes no sense.

        Show
        eduardo added a comment - I am closing this issue based on Patrick's comment of 30/Sep/11 05:20 AM – it can of course be reopened it dissatisfaction with its resolution continued, but if it is I would suggest that if the intention is to merge review and ballot into one, then we should just drop the concept of review, which in most contexts implies study, consideration and decision making, and just have a (2 week?) ballot period. Review and ballot at the same time makes no sense.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        The Spec Lead Guide is not the final authority - it simply summarizes what the current Process Document says.

        We've discussed this several times in the Working Group and agreed that we prefer the 2+2 weeks formula.

        Since the majority of JSRs take well over a year to complete we didn't think the extra "burden" was significant...

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - The Spec Lead Guide is not the final authority - it simply summarizes what the current Process Document says. We've discussed this several times in the Working Group and agreed that we prefer the 2+2 weeks formula. Since the majority of JSRs take well over a year to complete we didn't think the extra "burden" was significant...
        Hide
        Bill Shannon added a comment -

        According to the Spec Lead Guide http://jcp.org/en/resources/guide5,
        the 2 week JSR Approval Ballot starts when the JSR is posted. This
        is what we've been doing for years and I don't want this to change.
        Adding a 2 or 4 week delay to the start of the JSR Approval Ballot
        period is unacceptable.

        If the 2 week JSR Approval Ballot period can run concurrently with
        a 2 week JSR Review, that's fine.

        Show
        Bill Shannon added a comment - According to the Spec Lead Guide http://jcp.org/en/resources/guide5 , the 2 week JSR Approval Ballot starts when the JSR is posted. This is what we've been doing for years and I don't want this to change. Adding a 2 or 4 week delay to the start of the JSR Approval Ballot period is unacceptable. If the 2 week JSR Approval Ballot period can run concurrently with a 2 week JSR Review, that's fine.
        Hide
        eduardo added a comment -

        I have modified the definition of JSR Review to: A two- to four-week period (the length to be set at the discretion of the submitter) during which the public can review and comment on a proposed new JSR before the JSR Approval Ballot.

        And I have modified JSR Approval Ballot to: A two-week EC ballot to determine if the initial JSR submission should be approved

        Show
        eduardo added a comment - I have modified the definition of JSR Review to: A two- to four-week period (the length to be set at the discretion of the submitter) during which the public can review and comment on a proposed new JSR before the JSR Approval Ballot. And I have modified JSR Approval Ballot to: A two-week EC ballot to determine if the initial JSR submission should be approved
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        See last comment.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - See last comment.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        At the September 29 WG meeting we agreed:

        The review period should be 2 or 4 weeks at the discretion of the submitter.

        This is followed by a 2-week EC vote.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - At the September 29 WG meeting we agreed: The review period should be 2 or 4 weeks at the discretion of the submitter. This is followed by a 2-week EC vote.
        Hide
        Bill Shannon added a comment -

        Getting significant input from the community would require a lot more outreach
        than we're likely to do. Real input is going to come from Members who join the
        Expert Group.

        Remember also that, while not required, the submitter of the JSR will likely have
        reached out to the major players in that space before submitting the JSR and will
        have gotten and incorporated their feedback. The EC should consider whether the
        list of supporters of the JSR is sufficient to indicate that that was done.

        People who have done a good job of this will be anxious to get the Expert Group
        started as quickly as possible.

        Overlapping the JSR Review period and the JSR Approval Ballot period seems sufficient.

        Show
        Bill Shannon added a comment - Getting significant input from the community would require a lot more outreach than we're likely to do. Real input is going to come from Members who join the Expert Group. Remember also that, while not required, the submitter of the JSR will likely have reached out to the major players in that space before submitting the JSR and will have gotten and incorporated their feedback. The EC should consider whether the list of supporters of the JSR is sufficient to indicate that that was done. People who have done a good job of this will be anxious to get the Expert Group started as quickly as possible. Overlapping the JSR Review period and the JSR Approval Ballot period seems sufficient.

          People

          • Assignee:
            eduardo
            Reporter:
            pcurran
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: