From harmony-dev-return-2529-apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Mon Nov 14 06:45:28 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 29506 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2005 06:45:27 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Nov 2005 06:45:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 26467 invoked by uid 500); 14 Nov 2005 06:45:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 26413 invoked by uid 500); 14 Nov 2005 06:45:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 26402 invoked by uid 99); 14 Nov 2005 06:45:21 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:45:21 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [64.147.163.245] (HELO bucky.theory.org) (64.147.163.245) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:45:13 -0800 Received: by bucky.theory.org (Postfix, from userid 8000) id 6B09B1A88; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:45:00 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on bucky.theory.org X-Spam-Level: Received: from [192.168.254.160] (dsl2-63-249-113-35.cruzio.com [63.249.113.35]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bucky.theory.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B58A589 for ; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:44:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4378326A.4000304@theory.org> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:44:58 -0800 From: Neil Macneale User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: The Unofficial "Harmony, Licensing, the Universe and everything" FAQ References: <20051109133808.GB39347@bali.sjc.webweaving.org> <1131809195.29262.222.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1131809195.29262.222.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Old-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi Leo, > > On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 05:38 -0800, Leo Simons wrote: > >>I keep getting lost in the licensing discussions. I *think* the below accurately >>represents where we are right now. > > > Thanks for writing this down. I'll try to clarify some things below. > > There is one nitpick with the whole setup though. It really reads as if > harmony is just an ordinary Apache project. While when we started it we > want it to be something that is a much larger cooperative effort between > various different individuals, organizations and projects with similar > goals but completely different backgrounds. Presenting harmony as just > an Apache project doesn't do justice to it. And I feel it will fail if > we do that. There are a lot of people working on all the sister projects > who we currently are not giving the feeling they are part of our harmony > collaboration. This is not something specific to your email though. I > often get the feeling that people on this list act as if Apache is the > be all, end all for harmony and getting to a free software replacement > for the proprietary non-free j2se implementations. And that does push > away a lot of people who have been working on all this for years without > any Apache involvement at all. I personally feel that way at times > reading some of the discussions. Lets try to be a little more inclusive > and get the support of those hundreds of people working already on the > same goal, but who don't currently feel part of harmony. > > This may be some what off topic, but I'm going to ask anyway... I am not clear what it is about the GPL which does not allow someone to package it up and distribute it for use with non-GPL code. It seems that there are plenty of parts of the J2SE puzzle already available, regardless of their licenses. What is stopping anyone from putting them all together with their respective licenses and source files, and adding some polish and saying, "Here is a compliant java runtime! Enjoy."??? A well organized package could keep all the parts logically separated for anyone to figure out what the various sub-components are. You would be simply saving people the time required to put all the pieces together themselves. It seems that this sort of approach would be the best way to get lots of people, and other projects, involved. I'm lawyer-phobic, so anyone who can explain the problem with this in plain English, please do. (I'm assuming other people have considered this since it seems like such an obvious course to take if your goal is to produce a completely open java runtime). Thanks, Neil