Is the name just to satisfy some legal whatsit? What about just dropping the 'T'? It then becomes the "Jini Compatability Kit". Is that different enough?
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Peter Firmstone <[email protected]> wrote: > Nigel Daley wrote: >> >> On Oct 13, 2010, at 3:42 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote: >> >> >>> >>> River is an Implementation of the Jini Spec. >>> >>> There is a Patent covenant, see River-339 >>> >>> Sun is re-licensing its Jini technology Standard specifications under >>> ALv2 and providing a separate "Jini Community Standards Patent >>> Non-Assertion Covenant ("Covenant") that enables others to create >>> unrestricted independent implementations of the specifications. >>> >>> >>> There is a significant amount of remaining code, relevant to Apache >>> River, which we may not be able to use as subprojects due to code >>> provenance. >>> >>> I've closed River-338, which was for creating a subproject of the >>> existing implementation of Jini Surrogate, since I haven't been able to >>> satisfy code provenance rules. We can consider a clean room implementation >>> for Jini Surrogate. >>> >>> Nigel Daley has confirmed that he is the primary author of the Jini TCK, >>> River-32. Since Sun Microsystems licensed this code under AL2 and have >>> provided a Patent Covenant and Nigel is an Emeritus Committer of Apache >>> River, is this sufficient provenance to make a Subproject proposal for the >>> Discovery Lookup and Join Test Kit? >>> >>> If this is the case, I was also wondering if Nigel would like to propose >>> a name for the TCK Project? >>> >> >> Not much of a namer (just look at it's current name :p ). I happily defer >> to the active community :-) >> >> Cheers, >> Nige >> >> >> > > Can anyone think of name for the Jini TCK? > > > Cheers, > > Peter. > >
