logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <...@qos.ch>
Subject RE: New JMX code in 1.2 alpha
Date Sun, 30 Sep 2001 21:47:29 GMT

When you download jmx-1_0_1-ri_bin.zip from Sun's site, then you are asked to accept the "BINARY
LICENSE AND REDISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT". The file jmxtools.jar is shipped with that distribution.
The file jmxtools.jar contains 
com.sun.jdmk.comm.HtmlAdaptorServer.class. Thus, my assumption is that jmxtools.jar is covered
by the binary license. 
If that was not the case, that would constitute extremely crude form of bad-faith on the part
of Sun. IMHO, that is not very plausisble. However, I must admit that you some raise good
points. In particular, the jmx-1_0_1-ri_bin.zip does not come with a license file...

Regards, Ceki

ps: No tricks here. I just read the relevant licenses it and try to interpret them in good
faith.

At 21:42 30.09.2001 +0200, Mark Masterson wrote:
>Hi Ceki!
>
>>>The Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK) restriction imposes a serious
>financial burden on opensource projects. Look at JBoss and EJB
>certification. In short, the current licensing scheme of JCP does not seem
>to allow independent opensource implementations of JCP APIs. This is a major
>concern for the ASF.<<
>
>Yes, but that's precisely what I was driving at.  Here's my logic:
>
>1- one can't use the JMX without an implementation of *some* kind of adaptor
>(obviously, the HTTP adaptor would be simple enough - SNMP is a *lot* more
>complicated).
>2- The JMX itself provides no such implementations.
>3- Implementing such a thing oneself, however, causes one to fall afoul of
>the TCK issue.
>4- Using Sun's implementation (via the JDMK) is an even worse option, as the
>JDMK is a commercial product, and does not seem to fall within the province
>of the "BINARY LICENSE AND REDISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT" that you mention with
>regard to the JMX.  To quote Sun, here
>(http://www.sun.com/software/java-dynamic/qa.html;$sessionid$JMORE3AAAEKMXAM
>TA1LU45Q), answering the FAQ "What is the difference between the Java
>Dynamic Management Kit and the Java Management extensions (the JMX
>specification)?" - "Answer:  Java DMK is a commercial product while JMX is a
>freely available standard technology.".  Even the evaluation version of the
>JDMK, which is presumably what you're coding against in the 1.2 alpha, is a
>timed version which will expire at the end of next month!
>5- One is thus left without an adaptor or connector with which to
>communicate with the JMX API.
>
>It's not the JMX API itself that has me scratching my head, Ceki - it's the
>use of "com.sun.jdmk.comm.HtmlAdaptorServer".  How are you going to continue
>to use this, mid to long term? And if you can't, as I suspect, because it's
>commercial code, what could you possibly replace it with, without running
>afoul of the TCK problem?  Do you see what I mean?
>
>Please understand - I'm not being critical of using JMX.  I think it's a
>great idea.  I'm just confused about all the licensing modalities.  If
>you've discovered a way around them for Log4J, then I can probably use that
>same trick in my own project, so I want to understand what it is.
>
>--Mark
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

--
Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch

The world owes Israel a great debt for destroying Saddam's 
French built nuclear reactor in 1981 and thus preventing
nuclear blackmail in the region and perhaps beyond.
                       -- Garry Kasparov (yes, the chess player) 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message