No doubt I''m just stupid...
The new improved xsd still says:
No part of this document
may be reproduced in any form by any means without prior
written authorization of Sun and its licensors, if any.
Am I supposed to be able to figure out that the license _is_ such
prior written authorization?
As for other similar cases, I'm not aware of other schemas or dtds
from sun that have the explicit "PROPRIETARY CONFIDENTIAL" at the
top, but all (or almost all) the other ones I've seen have the
language I just quoted and (definitely) no license header. So,
assuming the current versions are actually OK to put in public svn,
it would be great to get copies of all the java ee 5, j2ee 1.4, j2ee
1.3, and j2ee 1.2 schemas and dtds with similar license headers.
Previously (IIUC due to some complaints from others at Sun) the
geronimo project has spent quite a bit of effort removing all these
schemas and dtds from public svn. We'd love to be able to put them
back.
Geronimo would like at least:
application-client_5.xsd
application_5.xsd
ejb-jar_3_0.xsd
handler-chain.xsd
javaee_5.xsd
javaee_web_services_1_2.xsd
javaee_web_services_client_1_2.xsd
jsp_2_1.xsd
persistence_1_0.xsd
web-app_2_5.xsd
web-facesconfig_1_2.xsd (already done)
web-jsptaglibrary_2_1.xsd
application-client_1_4.xsd
application_1_4.xsd
connector_1_5.xsd
ejb-jar_2_1.xsd
j2ee_1_4.xsd
j2ee_jaxrpc_mapping_1_1.xsd
j2ee_web_services_1_1.xsd
j2ee_web_services_client_1_1.xsd
jsp_2_0.xsd
web-app_2_4.xsd
web-jsptaglibrary_2_0.xsd
Although the portlet-app_1_0.xsd (http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/portlet/
portlet-app_1_0.xsd) doesn't have any restrictive language, it also
doesn't have any indication at all of its license in the xsd
itself. A license header would be a welcome improvement IMO.
many thanks,
david jencks
On Jun 20, 2007, at 9:31 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
I've been working with Sun to get the appropriate legal notices
changed in the relevant files: the xsd for faces 1.2 and the dtd
for faces 1.0 and 1.1.
Please take a look at the newly updated files at:
http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/web-facesconfig_1_2.xsd
http://java.sun.com/dtd/web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd
http://java.sun.com/dtd/web-facesconfig_1_1.dtd
The notices in these files should be self-explanatory. The files in
the faces repository should be refreshed with the latest versions
from the web. The NOTICE file in the distribution should be updated
to reflect the CDDL license (we don't want the GPL license option
do we).
If there are other similar cases, please let me know and I'll try
to get them updated as well.
Regards,
Craig
On May 21, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Does anyone here besides me see a problem with this copyright:
<!--
Copyright 2004 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL. Use is subject to license terms.
-->
appearing in these two files?
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/myfaces/core/trunk/impl/src/main/
resources/org/apache/myfaces/resource/web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd?
view=markup
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/myfaces/core/trunk/impl/src/main/
resources/org/apache/myfaces/resource/web-facesconfig_1_1.dtd?
revision=374886&view=markup
These two DTDs are part of the JSR 127 spec, so they should not be
Sun proprietary/confidential. Maybe the comments are proprietary/
confidential? Am I wrong for being annoyed that someone with
commit privs project would check files into an ASF repo with this
copyright statement, regardless of the technical justification?
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and
educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
