When filling out the ACQ[0], at the point you are asked about
exposure, you have been given no reason to discount exposure to
Apache Harmony (or other ALv2 compatible implementations such as
Android). It is only after you've stated your exposure (in the
paragraph after Part III, Item 5) that this is mentioned and even
then it gives no indication that you shouldn't try to answer Part
III, Item 6.
If you do attempt to answer question 6 then you are told to state
that you will not contribute to those components or indicate that
the issue is resolved and that the resolution:
must be one or more of (a), (b), or (c) above)
But in some cases the resolution is none of those it is the
"compatible with ALv2" clause in the paragraph preceding (a), (b)
and (c).
I propose we change the ACQ to read:
If you have answered yes to any question above, you may not be a
contributor to the related component of Apache Harmony unless
either:
a) that implementation is available under a recognized Open
Source license compatible with the Apache License v2;
b) the copyright owner of that implementation submits the
implementation to this project under the Software Grant or the
Corporate Contribution License Agreement (the CCLA);
c) if the copyright owner is your current employer, signs a CCLA and
lists you as a designated employee; or
d) if the copyright owner is not your current employer, submits
a written authorization disclaiming any copyright or confidentiality
interest in your current or future contributions to this project.
6. For each of the components listed above, please indicate either
that you will not be an Authorized Contributor for those
components at Apache Harmony, or indicate how you will resolve
the issue of previous exposure (must be one or more of (a),
(b), (c) or (d) above; if (a) please give details of the
implementation e.g. Apache Harmony, Google Android, etc.):
(and update the version number to v1.2). What do others think?
Regards,
Mark.
[0] http://harmony.apache.org/auth_cont_quest.txt
