harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Etienne Gagnon <egag...@sablevm.org>
Subject Re: SableVM? -- ICLA details
Date Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:33:26 GMT
Hi Geir,

>> If SableVM hosted an Apache License 2.0 on http://sablevm.org , then
>> Harmony could regularly import that code (and modifications) into its
>> repository.[...]
...
>> SableVM could also import back Harmony modifications in its svn, [...]
...
> Yes, that's true.... but it would run afoul of our concerns for IP
> provenance.  I'd be against this.

Oh, yes!  I should have thought about this.  It would effectively make
things much harder, trying to recover history across two repositories.
My recent experience tracing back all contributions within a single
repository with 4800+ revisions was painful enough (this doesn't even
begin to describe the real feeling).

>> Advantages:
>>...
>> - It is much easier to get Sun's TCK blessing a complete J2SE
>>   implementation, than having to build the J2SE from distinct, separate
>>   pieces (i.e. Harmony libs, SableVM vm, other downloadable separately
>>   pieces.)
> 
> That's not true.  There is no requirement in the TCK license for any
> such thing.

Interesting.  I had not realized this.  I thought that Harmony was
looking to certify an "all Harmony/Apache" system.

If it is OK to work towards certifying a combined system, then it would
be much better, in order to keep a clear IP trail of SableVM, if all of
its development happened in a single repository: user-targeted VM
development in trunk and research development in sandboxes.  My previous
vision of "user-targeted VM in Harmony svn" and "research in SableVM
svn" would actually be an IP trail nightmare.


> You are mixing apples and oranges, I think.  The ASF could switch to the
> BSD and still require the ICLA and SG.  The serve different purposes.

I think Stefano and explained my thought clearly [ much better than I
did :-) ]:  The ICLA is very (or ultimately?) permissive to the ASF.
The BSD/MIT/... licenses are more restrictive to the ASF.

While talking of it...  I take back my request for a document signed by
ASF officers;  I certainly don't want anybody to feel insulted.  It has
never been my intention to offend anybody, and certainly not the ASF!

> I'm not giving up, but if in the end we can't make ends meet, SableVM
> can stay put, and with the license change, be included in certified
> distributions of Apache Harmony.

Actually, your latest proposal seems very attractive.  Combined with the
earlier IP trail concerns, it seems to me like the easiest and fastest
road to fruitful collaboration.  :-)

Cheers,

Etienne

-- 
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D.            http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM:                                       http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC:                                       http://www.sablecc.org/

Mime
View raw message