On Jun 17, 2006, at 5:44 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:

>
>
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Hi Geir,
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2006, at 8:33 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>
>>> Craig L Russell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Indeed. And I believe that the released Persistence class is  
>>>> different
>>>> from the Geronimo implementation (and nothing against the  
>>>> Geronimo folks
>>>> but I'd rather use the glassfish implementation and fix bugs in the
>>>> glassfish project than the Geronimo project).
>>>>
>>>
>>> 1) Why?
>>
>> I don't see much value in typing specs into Java code.
>
> ?
I meant that there isn't much IP in the spec jars, so it's basically  
wasted time if the spec jars are available under a compatible license.
>
>>>
>>> 2) My problem with Glassfish is that you must sign over copyright to
>>> Sun, so they can then relicense your contribution in any way they  
>>> see
>>> fit without giving symmetrical rights back to you.  Seems like it  
>>> isn't
>>> a level playing field to me.  I'd rather not participate in that  
>>> sort of
>>> community development model.
>>
>> I understand. But there's not much IP contributing to a spec jar. I'm
>> not suggesting we contribute to the Reference Implementation. ;-)
>
> I know, but the whole thing is so annoying.  I am confident that Sun
> will fix this eventually, but man, I wish they'd trust us and do it
> sooner than later.

Annoying is not a good reason to waste energy implementing spec jars  
with a miniscule of IP, is it?

I'm not clear on what you think Sun is going to fix "eventually". The  
CDDL is brand-new, so it's not likely to change much, is it? It just  
seems it's an appropriate license for spec jars (and I think I  
understand your point that it's not good enough for reference  
implementation jars).

Craig

>
>>>
>>> So maybe the solution is just to ask for dispensation from the  
>>> ASF to
>>> fork the thing and keep a copy here?
>>
>> You say this jokingly but it might be the answer.
>
> I wasn't really joking, but for something like this where we hope  
> the EG
> gets it right, we wouldn't need to contribute back, really, so no, I'm
> not really advocating this.
>
>> But I'd still rather
>> try to use the existing open source repository, assuming that they  
>> are
>> responsive to fixes and provide patch (nightly) builds. This process
>> might be the one that makes my suggestion a non-starter.
>>
>> Craig
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ 
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!