![is jcp rewards account the same as jcp is jcp rewards account the same as jcp](https://i0.wp.com/mediavibestv.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/JCPenney-Rewards.jpg)
To make it very clear what changes we are calling for, we provide specific points, ranging from “must have” to “nice to have”. A fair voting system is used to maintain a balance of power and there is complete openness of process and membership.The goal of this organization, above all else, is to produce timely, iterative, high-quality standards, which means never standing in the way of progress nor precluding proposals or ideas that may lead to a better way forward.”
![is jcp rewards account the same as jcp is jcp rewards account the same as jcp](https://www.customerinsightgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/JCPenney-Rewards-Program.jpg)
IS JCP REWARDS ACCOUNT THE SAME AS JCP SOFTWARE
These goals are achieved by honoring the nature of software development, which means fostering a collaborative, evolutionary process where change of all types (addition, revision and deprecation) is inevitable and standards are snapshots in a timeline along that evolution.Standards produced by this process are published under and open, non-clickthrough license, which applies to the specification documents, the APIs, the reference implementations (RIs) and the compatibility test suites (TCKs). “An open, community-oriented standards organization that produces standard technical specifications for Java technology in order to keep it competitive and to bring value and choice to businesses worldwide. I propose that the JCP redefine itself as: Great, so let’s salvage it and get it moving again. He provides this evidence to make the point that the JCP is salvageable. There’s no doubt that Java EE has been experiencing a revival since the release of Java EE 6, but with no clear target for EE 7, how long can the honeymoon last? Bill Burke cites how a small company like Red Hat has been able to make a big impact on the JCP standards. It’s true that progress can emerge even from even a crippled process. The community becomes frustrated because they don’t know what’s going on. How can we expect to define a unified and consistent platform that integrates well if the technologies bundled are created in different campuses at different times? The decisions that occur behind close doors effectively turn off would be participants and consumers. There are also huge lapses between releases, which is time for the technology to fall out of date. Smaller releases would be easier to adopt. These major shifts in the platform make it increasingly harder for consumers to carry out migrations. Instead of following an iterative process, JSRs target big-bang releases that have no clear continuum to the next generation.
![is jcp rewards account the same as jcp is jcp rewards account the same as jcp](https://www.customerinsightgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/jcpenney-rewards-points.jpg)
The JCP also fails to respect the nature of software development. Let us not forget the significance of their participation, as Mark Little points out.Ī strong JCP and a strong EC should be to the benefit of the entire Java community and not just to a select few. While companies and major Java leaders are involved in the JCP, individuals from the Java community have to really fight to be included or provide feedback. The EG may reciprocate by publishing another specification draft, with or without the feedback incorporated. They don’t know how the EG arrived at that draft, meaning they aren’t able to study the discussions that went into it. All the general public can see are the drafts of the JSRs. EG members from one JSR can’t even read the correspondence of another JSR.įeedback is one directional, from community to EG. The private mailinglists don’t merely close the doors to the general public. The mailinglists are where the bulk of the technology design takes place. The root cause of this problem is that the Expert Group (EG) mailinglists are not open to the public (save a few exceptions, notably JSR-303 and JSR-311). The community is almost entirely excluded when developing so called “open standards”. Although the JCP defines itself as “the open, participative process to develop and revise the Java technology specifications, reference implementations and test suites”, it’s not very open nor participative in practice. Indeed, the central problem with the current JCP is lack of transparency and openness. Java is certainly more “open” now than it was a decade ago, but it’s not as open as other standards bodies. We believe that the EC still has an important role to play in the future of Java, and working within the EC is the best place to push for change and improvements. The goal and of this call to action parallels a statement made by Mark Little, CTO of JBoss and member of the EC, in response to questions for the 2010 EC candidates. Disclaimer: This call to action represents my views and not necessarily the views of my employer or any other entity as such, please try to keep that in mind when referencing this document externally.