geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
Date Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:54:54 GMT

On Aug 10, 2007, at 12:52 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:

> On Aug 9, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On 8/4/07, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm a bit confused though about the inclusion of cddl xsds in apache
>>> svn since IIUC you have indicated xsds are definitely "source
>>> code" (I completely agree) and the draft 3rd party licensing page
>>> says cddl source can't be in apache releases.  It doesn't say  
>>> whether
>>> a few files can be in svn or not AFAICT but that certainly looks  
>>> like
>>> it would prohibit shipping an asf jar with any cddl xsds in it.
>>
>> I've updated the draft 3rd party licensing page:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html
>
> +1
>
> Thanks for the update, Sam!

Agreed. Also, thanks for the timely and informative responses. They  
were very helpful in deciding how to move forward on this matter.

>
> IIUC, Geronimo makes two uses of the CDDL-licensed xsd files.
>
> 1. The unmodified xsd files are available to the xml parser to  
> avoid downloading the files from the internet during operation.
>
> 2. The unmodified xsd files are "compiled" into Java classes which  
> are then compiled into binary form for execution.
>
> The new policy seems to address both cases, assuming that Geronimo  
> chooses to update their copies of the files to the CDDL-licensed  
> versions.

Just to be precise, Geronimo does not currently use CDDL-licensed  
schema files. Moving to the CDDL-licensed versions of these schema  
files is, IMO, the right thing to do. I intend to start this next week.

There's still the question of how the CDDL license extends to the  
resultant binaries. Something for next week, I guess...

--kevan

Mime
View raw message