geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sam Ruby" <ru...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
Date Sat, 04 Aug 2007 19:50:14 GMT
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> As I see it there are two kinds of questions I'm asking:
>
> 1. Are the 6 questionable jars (4 I already mentioned plus a servlet
> spec jar with some retyped sun xsds and dtds) OK to release?
> Obviously the geronimo PMC thought so but this conversation has
> thrown that into doubt as far as I am concerned.  Is there some
> information you (or anyone else) would like in order to give an
> opinion?  I tried to explain the process used to generate these jars
> and the thinking behind the process already.  Note that none of these
> jars start from the cddl licensed sun schemas, they all start from or
> relate to the pre-cddl schemas.  I don't see these questions as being
> hypothetical, and I hope 6 jars isn't a dump truck.  The servlet spec
> jar under vote is at http://people.apache.org/~mcconne/geronimo-
> servlet_2.5_spec-1.1.tar.gz.  The vote passed but AFAICT it has not
> yet been called or the artifact actually released.

Legally, yes.

Now onto the next question.  Have you documented this in a way that
users of Geronimo codebase are aware of the composition of the
package?  Given the answer below, I'll presume no; so let's move onto
the next problem.  After we are done we can come back to this one.

> 2. Hypothetically, starting from the cddl licensed schemas, what can
> we generate from them, what can we include in apache svn and
> releases, and what license is any of this under?  The geronimo pmc
> has previously thought that generated source was under asl.  Craig is
> claiming that generated source is cddl, however as I tried to explain
> this point of view seems to me to lead to the entire server being
> required to be cddl.  In other words I think either Craig is wrong or
> apache can't develop any javaee products.  In addition I think
> Craig's argument applied to the pre-cddl xsds would entirely prevent
> apache releasing any j2ee or javaee products whatsoever.

So, the entire server is generated from these XSDs?  Sweet!  Must be
one kick ass generator.  :-)

Let's assume for the moment that Craig is correct (I believe that
section 3.5(*) of the license contradicts this interpretation).  Even
assuming that, how do you the leap from generated artifacts being CDDL
to entire server?

> Following onto 2, sometimes there are mistakes in the sun schemas
> that, well, prevent using them directly in completely compliant
> implementations.  For instance the web-app-2.5.xsd had a incorrect
> regular expression for http-method.  Assuming we eventually do use
> the cddl licensed schemas, and these are in publicly accessible
> apache svn, can we fix these errors?

Legally, as long as you comply with the CDDL license (in particular,
note sections 3.1 and 3.3(*)), yes.

Now as to ASF policy; in general ASF SVN repositories are for the
development of code under the Apache License.  I don't believe a few
files that are clearly marked would substantially change the fact that
the Geronimo SVN meets that criteria.  If you do proceed to do this,
mention it in the next regularly scheduled board report and move on.

- Sam Ruby

(*) http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html

Mime
View raw message