Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 35992 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2007 06:12:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2007 06:12:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 73853 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2007 06:12:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 73748 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2007 06:12:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jcp-open-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: jcp-open@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list jcp-open@apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for jcp-open@apache.org Received: (qmail 31554 invoked by uid 99); 10 Aug 2007 11:12:49 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of hps@intermeta.de designates 194.77.152.163 as permitted sender) Subject: Re: Looks like Sun responded to the Open Letter From: Henning Schmiedehausen Reply-To: hps@intermeta.de To: jcp-open@apache.org In-Reply-To: <46BC3B9E.5030808@apache.org> References: <46BAFAD1.2050404@apache.org> <3d4032300708091955i4604c1abv5285a88f969f52dc@mail.gmail.com> <1186732718.3695.224.camel@forge.intermeta.de> <46BC3B9E.5030808@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:12:15 +0200 Message-Id: <1186744335.3695.235.camel@forge.intermeta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 (2.6.3-2.fc5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (mail.intermeta.de [192.168.2.3]); Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:12:15 +0200 (CEST) X-INTERMETA-Spam-Score: (babsi.intermeta.de) -1.401 () ALL_TRUSTED,AWL X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 192.168.2.3 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, 2007-08-10 at 11:19 +0100, Steve Loughran wrote: > "An implementation is "substantially derived" from the OpenJDK code base > if it includes a large body of code existing in the code base that does > something identifiably significant, or implements some set of APIs in > their entirety. The code need not be part of Sun's implementation it > only needs to exist in the code base." > > the 'substantially derived' clause is there to stop anyone testing a > harmony release that I made under GPL, and certifying compliance. Which means that they are driving a wedge between "OpenJDK derived GPL implementations" and "grass roots GPL implementations" of J2SE 6 and beyond. The TCK license speaks only of J2SE 6. Now that is IMHO something that the FSF will not like... Maybe we should point this out specifically to RMS and just sit back. Best regards Henning -- Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- hps@intermeta.de | J2EE, Linux, |gls 91054 Buckenhof, Germany -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person |eau Open Source Consulting, Development, Design | Velocity - Turbine guy |rwc |m k INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH - RG Fuerth, HRB 7350 |a s Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buckenhof. Geschaeftsfuehrer: Henning Schmiedehausen |n