www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig McClanahan <craig...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: mx4j jar including javax.management... classes; activemq jar containing javax.management and javax.jms... classes - license question
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:09:41 GMT
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org> wrote:
>
>
> Le 03-déc.-09 à 16:40, Craig McClanahan a écrit :
>
>>> This is striking compared to W3C specs which do include properly licensed
>>> method names.
>>
>> *Names* or *implementations"?  They are two different things.
>
> java interfaces. Simply.
> Half-way or?
>

Just different.

In the JCP, you are required to provide implementations of the java.*
or javax.* API classes (along with your own classes implementing the
spec requirements), but are not allowed to publish them as a release
until you've passed the compatibility tests.

> paul

Craig

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message