Scoring a JSR for openness
--------------------------

The JCP is not an open organization - we all know this. It's also not a closed vendor organization. It lies 
somewhere in between. The individual JSRs that make up the work of the JCP have a lot of independence in how 
much openness they can exhibit. 

The following is a set of criteria for ranking the openness of a JSR. 

* Is the discussion open?
    # Are there read/write archived mailing lists for anyone?          = 1 pt.
    # Are there readable archived mailing lists for anyone?            = 1/2 pt.

* Is the decision making equal?
    # Do the expert group have an equal say?                           = 1 pt
    # Is the expert lead a dictator?                                   = 0 pt
    # Does a third party have a veto?                                  = -1 pt

* Is the expert group meritocratic?
    # That is, can an active contributor join the expert group?        = 1 pt

* Are open source implementations using any OSI license allowed?
    # That is, anyone can create royalty free implementations of 
      the specification?                                               = 1 pt

* Is a TCK freely available?
    # Is it released under an OSI approved license?                    = 1 pt
    # Is it available with no additional license restrictions?         = 1/2 pt

* Is the Reference Implementation open?
    # Is it developed under an open community with an OSI license?     = 1 pt
    # Is it available under an OSI approved license?                   = 1/2 pt


The JCP 2.6 declares that a propsal should have:

"a transparency plan, which outlines the tools and techniques that the Spec Lead will use, during the creation and development of the specification, and for communicating the progress within the EG to Community Members, EC Members and the public. The EC will expect the Spec Lead to operate the JSR in accordance with this plan."

So the above might be simplified to be an rating of transparency plans.