www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: JSR291 OSGi - request for comment on final vote
Date Mon, 21 May 2007 19:06:06 GMT

On May 21, 2007, at 2:47 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> On May 21, 2007, at 3:29 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> I don't see how these two are in any way connected.  I'm  
>> confused.  My comment above was just noting that the TCK license  
>> in the package accidentally failed to note that the TCK would be  
>> provided at zero dollar cost to non-profits, etc.   However the  
>> filing by IBM for this final draft does note that, and I consider  
>> the license in the TCK package just an oversight on IBMs part.
>
> Right, but licenses are critical and even an oversight has to be
> corrected before we can vote.  Now that the other half of the license
> has been posted by OSGi, I suggest we vote YES with a condition that
> the final package be updated to include all of the terms at
>
>   http://www2.osgi.org/JSR291/TCK
>
> ....Roy


Sure - will do.  There's also a statement from IBM to the EC in the  
vote documentation that the no cost license is available.  Next  
question is how much to put in the comment.

As a draft :

"Apache votes YES with the condition that the spec lead will include  
the corrected TCK license - as found at http://www2.osgi.org/JSR291/ 
TCK - in the final TCK package.  In addition, the ASF would like to  
thank the spec lead for the clear, simple and JSPA-compliant spec and  
TCK licenses, and strongly urge other spec leads to follow this  
example.  In order to deliver on the promise that the JCP creates  
"open specifications", the ASF requires spec leads to commit to  
specification and TCK licenses that, at the minimum, have no "Field  
of Use" or other restrictions that limit or encumber open source and  
free software implementations of Java specifications."

Anything else?

geir


Mime
View raw message