On 14.02.2012 23:36, Michaël Michaud wrote: > Hi Landon, > > Many things in your mail.
nearly tl;dr ;) > > I remember that OpenJUMP name came after JPP was created. > I've sometimes wondered if it wouldn't be necessary to create the > OpenJUMP project on sourceforge or on other forges, because > it would be confusing if someone else decided to create an > OpenJUMP project now... sf.net for sure is product centric... but i won't change a running system until there is need. if somebody opens an(other) openjump project we have to deal with it anyway, if on sf.net or somewhere else :) > About copyright, I agree that the code base does not follow clear > rules and it would need a serious clean up, but I can't see clearly > what the real problem is and why we should have to waive our > copyright to an organization to be serious. me neither, all modifications to oj's java is based on gpl code and hence automatically copyleft. we should rather cleanup the gpl header and enforce it's usage especially for new files, so it is clear the respective copyright holder makes it copyleft by contributing. > > I'm pretty attached to copyright, because I feel like having my > name associated with the code I wrote is about the only way to > get a little recognition for the work in the long run. theoretically every author would have to be mentioned. as this is practically an issue especially with old core code i'd vote to add author tags to javadoc method comments and such but keep the header clean. for initially created classes and code i am fine with a author's note in or below the header. > Morover, I think OpenJUMP is still very small to spend time in > administration tasks. But it can change quickly. So, let's see > what will happen this year. Exactly my point, lot's of bugs and featreqs laying around unresponded because a fistful of volunteers is not enough. > > And let's hear Stefan, Ede and other members. > As far as licensing is concerned, I'm afraid my 2 cents is only 1 cent. So in conclusion: - we should streamline the header (i'd like to make it smaller if possible) - add it to _all_ files e.g. start scripts (or at least a note regarding licensing) - negotiate a way how authors tag their code, if they want to Everything else is beyond our current scope i think. As promising the idea of JPP as an umbrella like Apache Project sounds, i really don't see our group in any shape near that. I don't have objections to the name though, if we decide to keep calling us like that and the product OpenJUMP that's fine with me. ..ede > > Michaël > >> First I want to talk about JPP versus OpenJUMP. Then I want to talk >> about copyright on OJ code. >> >> I'm still kind of attached to the Jump Pilot Project name, since >> that's what we used long ago when this all got started. I think it is >> important to remember that the Jump Pilot Project is technically the >> software project set-up to coordinate work on a number of JUMP forks. >> I view OpenJUMP as the product of that software project, not the >> project itself. That may not seem like an important distinction, but I >> could see the JUMP Pilot Project being set-up at some future point to >> help maintain JTS or JCS or other software related to OpenJUMP. For >> many months I've wanted to use some of the JUMP code to set-up a >> Geotools like library for OpenJUMP's simple feature model, which is >> simply the best I've ever seen implemented in code. I haven't had the >> time to do that yet, but I can see that being another product of the >> JPP. >> >> Apache is the organization that produces the Ant build tool. In a >> similar way, the JPP produces OpenJUMP. If you've been around long >> enough, you'll remember when we had the JPP, but OpenJUMP was just had >> a code base without a name. :] I know not everyone involved in >> development now has been around long enough to know all this, but I do >> think they are important details. >> >> As far as the copyright notice goes, I think we are a little bit >> sloppy with how we handle it. I'd prefer not to have a copyright >> notice at all, rather than a copyright notice done improperly. This >> get's especially tricky in OpenJUMP since we can have so many >> contributors working on a single class. >> >> It seems like most serious open source projects make you sign a >> copyright waiver before you contribute code. That is how I would >> prefer we handle copyright:You waive your copyright to contribute. If >> that makes people uncomfortable, I think we should have an opt-out >> system for copyright waiver. In this scenario you would specifically >> reserve copyright when you think your code is important and unique >> enough. We'd then have to track that. FYI: This sort of system will >> make it easier if we ever decide to formalize OpenJUMP as a >> non-profit. >> >> If we really want to handle this properly we should think about making >> OpenJUMP an OSGeo project or making the JPP a project of the Free >> Software Conservancy (http://sfconservancy.org/). I made the SurveyOS >> Project part of the Conservancy a while back, and they are good folks. >> This means they hold copyright to my code, offer some legal protection >> in the advent of a patent infringement lawsuit (or something similar), >> and can go after people who use the SurveyOS code and violate the GPL. >> >> If there is real interest in handling copyright properly, we should >> elect three or four people to the development committee and have them >> research our options. I'm willing to help the committee with the >> administration of this efffort, because I think it is important. >> >> Landon >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:14 AM,<edgar.sol...@web.de> wrote: >>> On 29.01.2012 01:10, Stefan Steiniger wrote: >>>> Hei all developers, >>>> >>>> while answering on an email on the JTS list, I saw that for >>>> DeleteDublicateGeometries I am still carrying the copyright although the >>>> class was changed by others (see the header below). >>>> >>>> However, for the test-class it was used: >>>> >>>> Copyright (C) 2012 The JUMP/OpenJUMP contributors >>>> >>>> for those who do not know: keeping the copyright notice apart from the >>>> license notice allows the author to reuse code later in another product >>>> ... you never know ;) >>> this is plain wrong. a proper copyright notice merely enables you to >>> contact all authors in case you need to (mostly relicensing). >>> >>>> (And this has been important for ISA and will be >>>> probably for the ADBToolbox makers) >>>> >>>> http://www.majordojo.com/2010/07/license-vs-copyright.php >>> this merely explains the difference between license and copyright, which is >>> there and will always be. >>> >>> to put it simple: >>> >>> by contributing under GPL every copyright owner grants the permission to >>> use and modify freely. he in a way waives his rights for usage under the >>> terms of GPL. so if somebody reuses the code under GPL this somebody does >>> not need permision or even know the copyright holder. >>> >>> a bit more precise: >>> >>> every contributor owns the copyright (intellectual ownership) to the code >>> contributed (if created by themselves). interestingly, this copyright >>> actually cannot be sold according to german law but other countries like >>> USA allow this. germany allows the sale of all exploitation rights though. >>> >>> by contributing to a GPL project, the code usually bases on other code of >>> the GPL project, hence the contribution falls automatically under GPL. if >>> this is not the case the contributor should be asked to explicitly license >>> the contribution accordingly. if not done the contribution could be "taken >>> away" again at any time by the copyright holder. >>> >>> having cleared that (re-)usage under the GPL is always fine there is the >>> other case. >>> but reusage in a nonGPL scenario is a totally different issue. you have to >>> ask each and every of the original authors (copyright holder) permission to >>> relicense their work. if cannot get one or two permissions you might be >>> lucky to be able to extract their parts. very often you might not be able >>> to contact everybody because the project is so old and had so many >>> contributors that you will likely have copyrighted work for that you don't >>> know the owner by name. >>> >>> in conclusion: it is not about the product you want to reuse the code but >>> the license the product is under ;) >>> >>> regards ede >>> >>> PS: regarding the notice in the source. i don't care. i would rather call >>> us openjump team now instead of jump pilot, but that's personal preference. >>> generally we should update all java source headers some time and we could >>> do it then. for my contributions i _only_ take the effort to add my >>> copyright if the chunks are big enough. mainly whole classes or extensions. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Try before you buy = See our experts in action! >>> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers >>> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, >>> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! >> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers >> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, >> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d >> _______________________________________________ >> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d > _______________________________________________ > Jump-pilot-devel mailing list > Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
