[JSR348-134] meta-issue: lack of enforcement creates loopholes, opportunities for misuse Created: 21/Sep/11  Updated: 22/Sep/11  Resolved: 22/Sep/11

Status: Closed
Project: jsr348
Component/s: Process Doc
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: sean_sheedy Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


it is lack of clarity that led to years of the EC being wrapped around the axle on Harmony. that's why I feel this is very important:

Process Document review

line numbers: JCP-2.8-21SEP2011-Redlined.pdf

200 - no enforcement when the EG does not behave openly, and appeals clause provides no defined remedies. Need some penalty if EC finds that EG is not acting openly.

PC> There are many places in this document where we state requirements without explicitly stating penalties for those who fail to meet them. I think this is appropriate, otherwise the document would be much longer, and more legalistic and intimidating than it already is. The ultimate penalty is for the JSR to be voted down. Perhaps we could add some language to the early statements of transparency requirements saying that EC members should take the EG's transparency record into consideration when voting. Please log an issue.

Comment by pcurran [ 22/Sep/11 ]

Added this language to section 1.1 EXPERT GROUP TRANSPARENCY

"The EC should take the Expert Group's transparency record into consideration when voting on its JSR."

Generated at Tue Feb 28 13:01:53 UTC 2017 using JIRA 6.2.3#6260-sha1:63ef1d6dac3f4f4d7db4c1effd405ba38ccdc558.