www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Fwd: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
Date Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:32:43 GMT
accidently sent this to sam only, why isn't reply-to set to the list?

Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>
> Date: August 3, 2007 9:51:43 AM PDT
> To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
> Subject: Re: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
> On Aug 3, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On 8/3/07, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Aug 3, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>>> <giant snip>
>>>> I didn't follow the full thread, but if CDDL licensed files  
>>>> exists for
>>>> this dtd I would include them *as* *is* (cddl header): I share the
>>>> interpretation that a dtd file that is not to be used as source to
>>>> generate a binary can be considered a binary wrt the CDDL and ALv2
>>>> licenses.
>>> I see this "it's a binary" point of view being expressed fairly
>>> often.  IMO this is a questionable point of view.
>>> There are at least 2 commonly used technologies that appear to treat
>>> schemas as source files and compile them into binaries (with the  
>>> help
>>> of the java compiler);
>>> xmlbeans (asl licensed)
>>> jaxb (some kind of sun license, I think CDDL)
>> First a note: the license of the compiler itself may not matter much.
>> I routinely use gcc.
>>> These both compile schemas into java classes and provide mapping  
>>> code
>>> of some sort.  It's really silly to try to build a javaee product
>>> without using one of these (or a similar product).  In particular
>>> geronimo uses xmlbeans and openejb uses jaxb for this purpose.
>>> Furthermore any javaee product is going to need some kind of java
>>> object representation of the information in the deployment
>>> descriptors corresponding to the schemas under discussion, and some
>>> code to transfer the information from these dds to the java objects.
>>> What's the difference between automatically generated/compiled code
>>> and hand written code (using say DOM or SAX or STAX?) that transfer
>>> information from a document complying with one of these schemas to a
>>> java object designed to contain the same information?
>> It may very well turn out that the policy is usage dependent.
>> Referencing a DTD in a <!DOCTYPE> declaration is quite a different
>> proposition than providing an XSD as input to JAXB.  This may lead to
>> surprising conclusions, for example it may end up being the case that
>> ASF Policy would be OK with MyFaces shipping a given file but not OK
>> with Geronimo shipping that exact same file based on the intended
>> usage.
>> Let me emphasize that this is a policy issue, not a legal issue.
>> Legally we can't ship source to things that are marked SUN
>> PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL, but not only can we ship code that is
>> licensed under CDDL, we are free to relicense entire codebases under
>> that license.
>> Of the three things mentioned in the first paragraph, we need to stop
>> doing the first, we won't ever do the third, and we need to
>> collectively decide when we will allow the second.
> My point is that allowing asf projects to ship cddl licensed xsds  
> but not allowing them to ship xmlbeans or jaxb classes compiled  
> from those cddl licensed xsds is roughly equivalent to prohibiting  
> shipping cddl licensed xsds entirely and may make it implausible to  
> keep geronimo and openejb (at least) at apache.  Given the  
> prevalence of xsd based code generators I don't see how an argument  
> based on xsds being "binary" can hold up.  I certainly hope there  
> is some clear line of argument that lets us actually use the xsds  
> that Craig went to so much trouble to get relicensed.
> Also, geronimo has been shipping since 1.0 with xmlbeans classes  
> generated from the sun licensed j2ee schemas.  After we noticed the  
> legalese in the schemas themselves we  stopped shipping the  
> schemas, and just included the generated classes.
> thanks
> david jencks
>> - Sam Ruby

View raw message