www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [Draft] New ASF/JCP Policies
Date Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:32:49 GMT
FWIW - this wasn't strictly the JCP-side of the policy, but ASF-wide.
Granted in JCP-terms, there is one TCK.  Other standards bodies will
define things differently.

Bill

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> On Jul 2, 2007, at 1:10 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> 
>>
>> There are actually two ways around this.  We don't care if a TCK/test
>> suite
>> is closed source/NDA, even when it's considered the reference test. 
>> We do
>> care, however, that we cannot label our code as an implementation until
>> it passes a closed source/NDA suite.
> 
> 1) Drop the bit about "closed source" for the test kit.  That's irrelevant.
> 
> 2) You can't call it complete or compatible w/o passing the test suite.
> 
>>
>> So, if a JSR either spell out that the closed/NDA suites are
>> reference, but
>> not the sole authoritative test of compliance, or ... spell out the
>> reference
>> test - which is authoritative - must not be subject to NDA.
> 
> The EG has to deliver the sole authoritative test - there only is one.
> 
>> (I don't know
>> that we care if we can or cannot republish it.  We only care, I believe,
>> that the ASF committer can obtain and use that test without additional
>> burdens
>> or liabilities.)
> 
> How can you agree to not republish if there are no additional burdens or
> liabilities when obtaining said thing we can't republish?
> 
> geir
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message