Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [microprofile-wg] MPWG_SCR Approval of April 27th Steering Committee Meeting Minutes. Request vote by May 6th
Thank you, John for sending the draft minutes for review & follow up. 

Recommended the follow adjustements to the minutes:
  • time: Presentation and soft Q&A took the 1hr, not 30mins
  • Recording issue: The EMO would have no presented the topic if call was recorded.  for 15 minute the members discussed issues with lack of recordings and concern about the lack of it. It was agreed that if any EMO presentation cannot be recorded, the MPWG must be made aware 2 weeks before the call. 
  • Topic: the EMO Presented to the MPWG a 20 pg Patent Licences in the Context of the EFSP. 
  • Goal: to enable the MPWG to choose 1 of the currently 2 patent choices under the EF:  Implementation or Compatible Patent
  • Additional link under minutes resources: EF Intelectual Property Policy  needs to be included. 
About the 2 patent options:
An efficient analysis of Implementation Patent with its Pros & Cons is necessary and was recommended in the call.
An efficient analysis of Compatible Patent with its Pros & Cons is necessary and was recommended in the call.

Been years, yet I don't believe the Jakarta WG voted nor chose its patent.  
I recommend the completely removal of the Jakarta EE patent mention from this minutes.  It is not an actual example of past work on EF Patent selection.   

Straw poll request: We actually didn't agree to vote on it in 2 weeks. At least not without discussion (analysis)  first. 

When providing examples of other Communities and their current work on Patents, can we please use the actual links or videos that shows those communities conversations.  Hearsay ought to be avoided in all topics, specially legal. 

-- Thanks, 


On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:24 PM John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Meeting Minutes link, contents pasted below, and pdf copy attached.

Meeting Minute Updates
  • Link to twitter picture added.
  • Link to presentation added.
  • I added bulleted discussion points. I did the best I could with what I recalled since we were petty busy discussing and not taking live notes.

DO NOT EDIT OR COMMENT ON THE ORIGINAL MEETING MINUTES.
Thanks.


MicroProfile Steering Committee Meeting - April 27th, 2021



Rules
  1. DO NOT EDIT AGENDA. This is the responsibility of the meeting moderator with input from the steering committee and community. Agenda items should be discussed in the mailing list/forum or in prior Steering Committee meetings first.
  2. Prefer comments occur in mailing lists/forums.
  3. Document editing is enabled for community to add themselves to list of community contributors during call

Tweeted pic here, recording here, meeting minutes folder here


Meeting Attendees
Steering Committee
(Quorum = 6)
Community
(Name, organization)
Atlanta JUG - Summers Pittman, Vincent Mayers
Fujitsu - Kenji Kazamura
IBM - Kevin Sutter, Emily Jiang
iJUG - 
Jelastic - Ruslan Synytsky, Tetiana Fydorenchyk
Garden State JUG - Chandra Guntur, Michael Redlich
Oracle - Ed Bratt, Dmitry Kornilov
Payara - Rudy De Busscher
Red Hat - John Clingan, Roberto Cortez
Tomitribe - David Blevins, Amelia Eiras
Committer Member: Edwin Derks

Eclipse Foundation
Paul Buck 
Sharon Corbett
Ivar Grimstad
Tanja Obradovic




Agenda Item
Minutes
Past meeting minutes approval
Business since last Steering Committee Meeting

Current Items
MicroProfile Patent Options Discussion
Limited to 30 minutes since sharing time on the Live Hangout
  • Discussion
    • Compatible Implementation Policy - protects against fragmentation and patents become a legal enforcement approach to compatibility. The Spark Plug community discussed this being a barrier to adoption.
    • Patent license - implementations that do not have to 100% pass the TCK. This approach favors adoption over compliance. Whether or not an implementation is compatible becomes a legal question.
    • Only one patent license policy applies per spec project. MicroProfile specifications are managed under a single project. Theoretically, if MicroProfile split specs into separate projects, each project could choose its patent policy with approval by the Steering Committee.
    • Is there a 3rd option - Collective Defense? Currently not an option.
    • Paul noted that Jakarta EE working group chose the compatible implementation license and that the Spark Plug working group is in discussion on IP patent policy.
    • Paul recommended a straw poll vote to understand where we stand as a working group. We agreed to give it two weeks. This would be followed up by a formal vote on one of the two (draft) resolutions outlined in the presentation.
    • We agreed that Steering Committee members must be notified of non-recorded meetings ahead of time.
Next Steering Committee call
Parking Lot



Compatibility Certification Request Format

_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg

Back to the top