On Apr 15, 2009, at 1:09 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
This issue has come up in a discussion on the Pluto dev list last
week, and as I think it concerns Apache Portals in general, I'm
bringing this to the general list now for further discussion and
hopefully a quick resolution.
We're getting very close to finalizing both Pluto 2.0 and Jetspeed
2.2, both implementing the new JSR-286 spec, so we better decide
what to do with this ASAP.
Please all read and review the original discussion here:
http://www.nabble.com/-RT--Moving-the-portlet-api-out-of-pluto-tree-td22928540.html
The main question to decide upon is:
Should we create and maintain our own Apache Portals Portlet API
spec sources and jars
This would mean we apply our own maven groupId:
<groupId>org.apache.portals</groupId>
and for the artifactId something like:
<artifactId>portals-portlet-api_1.0_spec</artifactId>
<artifactId>portals-portlet-api_2.0_spec</artifactId>
This then will allow us to maintain independent releases of our own
spec jars, javadoc, etc.
When we decide the above, we should no longer build against nor
release any of the JCP provided spec jars but only use our own.
This will have little consequences for our projects other than some
minor maven pom changes and changing our deploy/installation
strategies.
Furthermore, the new "home" for our portlet api projects (already
started with http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-548) allows
us to provide easy available online references for (our) portlet api
javadoc at http://portals.apache.org/portlet-spec
The critical question however is: are we legally (and license wise)
allowed to do the above?
Especially, would "certification" against the JSR-168/JSR-286 by
passing their respective TCKs still be still valid, or requires the
JCP (and or TCK) to only use the official spec jars for that?
The sources for the JSR-286 spec are originally created/developed at
Pluto and those for the JSR-168 were formally donated by SUN/IBM.
IMO, these sources belong to the "ASF" and we are free to do with
them as we decide ourselves, right?
As Geronimo has been doing the same already for years maybe David
Jenks can provide a clear answer!
IANAL :-)
I think its a good idea to have apache licensed and distributed spec
jars. I think that Apache's license to implement the spec includes the
right to write and distribute our own spec jars. Sun hasn't objected
to all the geronimo spec jars and they've been clearly visible for
years. I haven't looked at the portlet tcks recently but the ee tck
certainly includes a signature test to make sure that all the specs
are present with the correct class signatures. WIth such tests in the
tck I can't see any possible problems with our own spec jars.
thanks
david jencks
Regards,
Ate
