db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: 10.2 licensing issue...
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:40:20 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:

>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>  
>
>>Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I read Rick's note on the 10.2 licensing issue in an archive because of
>>>strange move to the user list, so sorry for the weird quoting :
>>>
>>>He said :
>>>
>>>"I must report today that the restrictions imposed by the beta JDK
>>>license have not been lifted.
>>>
>>>As you know, the JDK 6 beta license requires a disclaimer that bars the
>>>use of the code for any productive use....
>>>
>>>snip
>>>
>>>...For this reason, we, the Derby community must change our
>>>plan to ship imminently an official release of Derby that includes
>>>JDBC4."
>>>
>>>Let me start with a question :
>>>
>>>Why?  Is this all about having a set of API jars to compile against, or
>>>is it something more?
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Hi Geir,
>>
>>In a nutshell, yes. We can use the compiler from JDK 5 without any
>>licensing restrictions--for our purposes it's just as good as the JDK 6
>>compiler. However, a restrictive beta license covers the apis in the JDK
>>6 jars.
>>    
>>
>
>This reminds me of the old gag :
>
>"Doctor, my arm hurts when I lift it"
>"Don't lift it then..."
>
>Don't use the JDK 6 jars.  All you need to do is *compile*, so lets make
>our own JARs that get things to compile.
>  
>
Hi Geir,

I did consider this option. The following problems bothered me:

A) I couldn't figure out how to build the dummy jars without cribbing 
templates from either the beta code or beta javadoc. To me this cribbing 
seemed like a forbidden, productive use of the beta-licensed distribution.

B) It seemed, frankly, a little sneaky and a violation of the spirit of 
the license.

Regards,
-Rick

>Is there any runtime dependency on Java SE 6?
>
>geir
>
>  
>


Mime
View raw message