Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals
Hi Daniel, I'm not especially comfortable with the level of diversity in the initial committer lists, and am currently -0 on both projects. I assume that this is related to the recent discussion of the composition of the Axis/C++ team. Would it help if I change my email address to @watson.ibm.com? Then there will be committers from Sonic, IBM, Virtusa and University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. Is that sufficiently diverse? Glen/Dug, based on what happened at the RM interop meeting, do you know of other companies who may be interested in seeing an RM impl at Apache? Sanjiva.
Re: WS-RM open source impl and NDA [Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals]
AFAIK there was no NDA - there was a (standard IBM/MSFT) feedback agreement which grants certain prividges to the authors w.r.t. feedback given by others. I believe the results were / will be published. IBM/MSFT have committed to publishing these RF, but you are correct that that's not granted yet. I personally don't think we need to push on this, but if necessary I'm certain I can get the appropriate RF license issued. I think we're going overboard about it but then I'm no lawyer. I'm still curious to see Glen's answer as an implementor of WS-RM. (Or anyone else who has - Dims, did u guys do one too?) Sanjiva. - Original Message - From: Aleksander Slominski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 9:28 PM Subject: WS-RM open source impl and NDA [Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals] Davanum Srinivas wrote: There was an Interop for WS-RM (http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3901) and AFAIK no one was asked to get a license for doing an implementation. So it should be ok. hi, actually they did this under some kind of NDA (did you nitice there is no resultsfrom Workshop published ...). so you have to sign this agreemenet if you wanted to join them and thr same NDA is required to join discussion list - i am attaching it (it is Word file) and here is its content. maybe WS-RM spec author(s) could comment on that - i am really fuzzy if it ok for us to require everybody to sign it who works (or look) on WS-RM? it isseems that they *intend* to grant a Royalty-Free but that has not yet happened AFAIK (see in text below)? thanks, alek *WS-ReliableMessaging Interop Workshop Agreement Sept 2003* BEA, IBM, Microsoft, and TIBCO (Authors) of the WS-ReliableMessaging (March 13, 2003) specification (the Specification) are hosting a 3-day workshop on Oct 14-16, 2003 (Interop Workshop) to (i) discuss the Specification, including sharing background information on its design, (ii) solicit feedback on the Specification, including general thoughts about the problem spaces addressed by the Specification and the practicality of implementing the Specification, and (iii) provide the opportunity for interoperability testing by the attendees, including you or your company (you, and your Company if you are participating on behalf of your company, are collectively referred to herein as Participant). Participant is expected to respect the privacy of others since, for example, other participants may be working with pre-release code. Results of each testing session in the Interop Workshop are not intended to be publicly posted. By participating in the Interop Workshop, Participant agrees not to disclose, comment on or otherwise characterize, in any manner, the results of the interoperability testing or of the operation of any other participant's products or applications tested at the Interop Workshop without such other participant's prior written consent. Consistent with the goals of the Interop Workshop, the Authors may publicize general results of the Interop Workshop testing through press release and post-event briefings of selected industry analysts and press. This will likely include general event information, overview of the list of participants, and the collective results of the testing. Participant is free to issue individual press releases that discuss its general involvement in the Interop Workshop. The Authors of the Specification and authors of the related specification (Authors of Related Spec) listed below (Related Spec) intend to submit revised versions of the Specification and Related Spec to a standards body, in which case they intend to grant a Royalty-Free (zero royalties with other reasonable and non-discriminatory terms) license to their necessary patent claims. Participant will be invited to provide comments and feedback on the Specification and/or Related Specs, but both sets of Authors need assurance that any such comments and feedback provided by Participant, either during or subsequent to the Interop Workshop, (Comments) are provided in a manner that is consistent with that goal. Participant is not required to provide any Comments on this Specification or any Related Spec, but any Comments that Participant does provide may be incorporated into this Specification or Related Spec. By signing below, Participant grants to the Authors of the Specification and the Authors of Related Spec a non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free copyright license to copy, publish, license, modify, sublicense or otherwise distribute and exploit Comments you provide. Likewise, if incorporation of your Comments into a version of this Specification or any Related Spec would cause an implementation of any such Specification or Related Spec (as modified) to necessarily infringe a patent or patent application
Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals
+1 from me for both. -- dims --- Sanjiva Weerawarana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dims asked me to follow-up on the discussion we had ref starting a new umbrella subproject to host other WS-* implementations. I'd like to call a vote for creating the WS-Fx project per http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?WebServicesProjectPages/Charter ForWSFx as well as for the Sandesha project per http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ReliableMessagingProposal Dims wants to hold off on the WS-Security stuff until he has more discussion with RSA Security regarding IP/license issues. Here's my vote: +1 for both proposals. Sanjiva. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals
(just my tuppenuth but) probably wouldn't hurt to check with licensing at apache. - robert On 12 Nov 2003, at 13:20, Davanum Srinivas wrote: There was an Interop for WS-RM (http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/3901) and AFAIK no one was asked to get a license for doing an implementation. So it should be ok. Thanks, dims --- Sanjiva Weerawarana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aleksander Slominski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: however how are IP issues resolved for WS-ReliableMessaging from http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-rm/ it is not clear to me if WS-RM can be implemented as open source? Hmm. Good question. Glen, when Sonic implemented WS-RM did you need a license from IBM etc.? I can certainly get whatever is needed I believe; just need to know what we need. Dims, does Apache need anything specific to make it safe? Sanjiva. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/
Re: VOTE: WS-Fx and Sandesha proposals
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: Dims asked me to follow-up on the discussion we had ref starting a new umbrella subproject to host other WS-* implementations. I'd like to call a vote for creating the WS-Fx project per http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?WebServicesProjectPages/Charter ForWSFx as well as for the Sandesha project per http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ReliableMessagingProposal Dims wants to hold off on the WS-Security stuff until he has more discussion with RSA Security regarding IP/license issues. Here's my vote: +1 for both proposals. +1 in principle. however how are IP issues resolved for WS-ReliableMessaging from http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-rm/ it is not clear to me if WS-RM can be implemented as open source? is it safe for Apache to host it considering following warning? (...) Copyright© EXCEPT FOR THE COPYRIGHT LICENSE GRANTED ABOVE, THE AUTHORS DO NOT GRANT, EITHER EXPRESSLY OR IMPLIEDLY, A LICENSE TO ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING PATENTS, THEY OWN OR CONTROL. Copyright© THE WS-RELIABLEMESSAGING SPECIFICATION IS PROVIDED AS IS, AND THE AUTHORS MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, OR TITLE; THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE WS-RELIABLEMESSAGINGSPECIFICATION ARE SUITABLE FOR ANY PURPOSE; NOR THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SUCH CONTENTS WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS OR OTHER RIGHTS. Copyright© THE AUTHORS WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO ANY USE OR DISTRIBUTION OF THE WS-RELIABLEMESSAGING SPECIFICATION. Copyright© The WS-ReliableMessaging Specification may change before final release and you are cautioned against relying on the content of this specification. Copyright© The name and trademarks of the Authors may NOT be used in any manner, including advertising or publicity pertaining to the Specification or its contents without specific, written prior permission. Title to copyright in the WS-ReliableMessaging Specification will at all times remain with the Authors. (...) what did i miss? thanks, alek -- The best way to predict the future is to invent it - Alan Kay
