www-jcp-open mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathan Beyer" <ndbe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: stubbed out implementations of jcp-managed interfaces
Date Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:23:47 GMT
I believe something similar is done to compile the OSGi code. If you
register to download the specification, a couple of the provided
downloads are JARs that are the compiled stubs and source for the
CDC/etc that the OSGi classes are compiled against.

If you look at the stub source, they seem to have ASLv2 license with a
copyright claim to Sun and the OSGi Alliance.

As for creating the stubs, the Harmony project works under the
assumptions Henri mentioned below. You can use the spec (the javadoc)
to build the source, but you can't copy the javadoc comments.

-Nathan

On 10/26/07, Henri Yandell <bayard@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10/26/07, Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@sun.com> wrote:
> > The following issue has come up on the Derby developer list and I would
> > like your advice about how to proceed:
> >
> > In order to build a releasable distribution of Derby, a developer needs
> > to compile Derby's small device support. Right now, this involves
> > finding an implementation of the CDC foundation classes and the JSR 169
> > database interface classes--both of which implementations are licensed
> > under JCP rules. As far as I know, the only implementations of these
> > interfaces are available from companies which require that you accept
> > their additional, encumbering licenses. Rather than sending every
> > release manager out on this hunt, I'd like to be able to check in enough
> > Apache-compatible machinery that the Derby build would always
> > automatically compile the small device support.
> >
> > One possibility would be to create our own stubbed out implementation of
> > the CDC foundation and JSR 169 classes. A warning, however, has been
> > raised. We are worried that the JCP rules may not allow us to create a
> > stubbed out implementation which is only useful for compilation
> > purposes. Is that also the opinion of the jcp-open@apache.org list?
> >
> > I would appreciate your advice on how I can get my hands on unencumbered
> > compile-time machinery so that I can simplify the Derby build.
>
> I thought Geronimo had done this a lot - you can use the spec to build
> it but you can't use the javadoc as that is copyrightable. As long as
> we don't release it claiming it is a certified implementation of the
> JSR, then I think we're fine.
>
> Will let others chime in if they think different.
>
> We've long talked about having a central location for all of these
> jars to sit so we're not all playing hunt-the-jar when its time to
> find such a stub.
>
> Hen
>

Mime
View raw message