Hear us Roar
About Fear and Fuss
The main point in this article is not whether
Castor has the right to call it JDO or must call
it somehow else or ... (As I understood right,
they *could* call it JDO, if they state that
'J' is not the 'J' in Java anyway, which would
be much more confusing)
The point is that there is a specification (JDO)
started at some point in time, and a product (Castor)
available even some time before this other specification
project finally produced an output. An old proverb says:
The early bird catches the worm. If Castor would be so
much inferior to JDO, no one would use it. Even if they
would have gathered some attraction by using a misleading
advertisement, it would certainly have create a loud cry
'foul play' if their product would have been unusable or
some inferior experiment.
The problem that pops up here lies deeper. The is not a
competition when it goes to finding good solutions to
for common application scenarios. There is an organized
mechanism that allows a 'junta' of application vendors which
pay the price to join the club to mark their stuff (more or
less modified) as a Java Specification. If you look at some
standards, you will clearly notice sometimes the handwriting
of a particular vendor. And it can be assumed that the vendor's
primary intention in creating what did later grew into an JSR
was not making some specification. It was (and this is clearly the
right of any vendor) the creation of a software product.
Perhaps you remember other things on that Java Specification
Requests and that Java Community Process. There was
fuss with the Jakarta project. There is still fuss regarding
clean room implementations of a standard (and, studying some
reference implementations, this would sometimes be more than
just a benefit). There was fuss with Java logging.
The intention of a specification process is also comparing different
approaches, approaches which even may not have originated by one of
the people doing the specification work, which is of course not only
difficult for the ego, but sadly also often politically impossible.
Just my 2 cents.