ssage-
From: Kevan Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 9:55 AM
To: Craig L Russell
Cc: Sam Ruby; David Jencks; ASF Legal Discuss; Geronimo Dev List (JIRA)
Subject: Re: SUN PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL code in myfaces
On Aug 10, 2007, at 12:52 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
On Aug 9, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm a bit confused though about the inclusion of cddl xsds in apache
svn since IIUC you have indicated xsds are definitely "source
code" (I completely agree) and the draft 3rd party licensing page
sa
On Aug 10, 2007, at 12:52 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
On Aug 9, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm a bit confused though about the inclusion of cddl xsds in apache
svn since IIUC you have indicated xsds are definitely "source
code" (I com
On Aug 4, 2007, at 12:15 PM, David Jencks wrote:
2. Hypothetically, starting from the cddl licensed schemas, what
can we generate from them, what can we include in apache svn and
releases, and what license is any of this under? The geronimo pmc
has previously thought that generated source
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As I see it there are two kinds of questions I'm asking:
>
> 1. Are the 6 questionable jars (4 I already mentioned plus a servlet
> spec jar with some retyped sun xsds and dtds) OK to release?
> Obviously the geronimo PMC thought so but this co
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> BTW, the theory under which we (geronimo) has been operating is that
> the sun copyright and legal statements apply to the text
> documentation in the schemas and that once that is removed the rest
> forms a part of the javaee specifications th
On Aug 4, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As I see it there are two kinds of questions I'm asking:
1. Are the 6 questionable jars (4 I already mentioned plus a servlet
spec jar with some retyped sun xsds and dtds) OK to release?
Obviously
On Aug 4, 2007, at 4:23 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On 8/4/07, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW, the theory under which we (geronimo) has been operating is that
the sun copyright and legal statements apply to the text
documentation in the schemas and that once that is removed the rest
form
On Aug 4, 2007, at 3:23 AM, David Jencks wrote:
OK, on to a more specific and time-critical question.
Geronimo has the pre-cddl j2ee 1.4 and javaee5 schemas in the
hidden tck svn repo, and we use xmlbeans to generate classes from
them. Previously we've released source and .class jars fo
On Aug 3, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
On Aug 3, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Sam Ruby ha scritto:
Until the dust settles, I'm asking that all SUN
PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL dtd's and xsd's be removed. For the
moment,
they can be be replaced by CDDL licensed equiva
Here's the relevant part of the file, that is "prior written
authorization" from Sun:
The contents of this file are subject to the terms of either the GNU
General Public License Version 2 only ("GPL") or the Common Development
and Distribution License("CDDL") (collectively, the "License"). You
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 au
12 matches
Mail list logo
