[jdom-interest] JSR-102

[Mike Brenner]

Jason, 

I thought the purpose of a JSR was not to have it
included in J2SE, but in the J2SDK (the development kit).

That seems to be a logical step after getting to 1.0.

Before cancelling it, could you please list the work 
we would have to do, and then give us 3 months
to see if we can do that work?

Thanks,
Mike


Jason Hunter wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> FYI, I plan on writing in to cancel JSR-102 with the following explanation:
> 
> "Withdrawn at the request of the submitter.  The project was completed
> under the open source development model and can be found at
> http://jdom.org."
> 
> This will appear on the cancelled JSR list at
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/withdrawn.html.
> 
> It's a long story why we didn't pursue the JSR.  The short version is
> that after getting JSR-102 accepted I found out the JCP didn't support
> an open source development model or open source licensing model.  I
> worked for two years to change that as Apache's representative to the
> JCP.  We succeeded, but afterward I didn't have any desire to continue
> in the field of JCP politics!  I didn't want to cancel the JSR lest
> someone else want to take up the mantle, but that hasn't happened.
> People always seemed more interested in JDOM 1.0 than in JDOM the JSR.
> 
> The biggest benefit JSR-102 promised was inclusion in J2SE.  I've
> discovered that's a heck of a lot of work though.  During EC meetings I
> heard IBM complain about the amount of work foisted on them for getting
> an API into J2EE.  Nevermind a volunteer group getting something into
> J2SE!  We'd have an easier time becoming an "endorsed standard" like SAX
> where Java just blesses and includes an externally created API.
> 
> So that's my plan.  Here's a last chance for community input before I
> fire the cancellation request...