On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 06:50:44PM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
>
> Dalibor Topic wrote:
>
> >
> >On a Harmony-unrelated side note, if you are interested in seeing your
> >port in the Kaffe.org CVS tree, and your contract allows for it, feel
> >free to send me the patch. :)
> >
>
>
> On a
Stefano,
I think we should take Geir's advice and pipe down a bit. Those whose task it
is to resolve this issue are by now pretty aware of the issues involved, and
our "explanations" to eachother serve only to increase entropy.
Meanwhile we may meditate on Jorge Luís Borges' story _Pierre Menar
Chris Gray wrote:
Hi Etienne,
A little clarification. I don't claim that you can't study another's
Free/Open Source (F/OS) VM source code, or that you can't contribute to
multiple VMs over time. I claim that this does not allow you to COPY
one VM's source code into another one without respect
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Hi Leo,
Leo Simons wrote:
Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
outside of the public forum (I must say I personally find that a shame
-- all of the open source community
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 07:28:54AM -0800, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:38:00AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> > >Leo Simons wrote:
> > >>Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
> > >>of the conversation related to this issu
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:38:00AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> >Leo Simons wrote:
> >>Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
> >>of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
> >>outside of the public forum (I must
--- Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> > Hi Leo,
> >
> > Leo Simons wrote:
> >> Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has
> informed me that some
> >> of the conversation related to this issue is
> currently also proceeding
> >> outside of the public
Hi Etienne,
> A little clarification. I don't claim that you can't study another's
> Free/Open Source (F/OS) VM source code, or that you can't contribute to
> multiple VMs over time. I claim that this does not allow you to COPY
> one VM's source code into another one without respecting the Copyr
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Hi Leo,
Leo Simons wrote:
Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
outside of the public forum (I must say I personally find that a shame
-- all of the open source communit
Hi Leo,
Leo Simons wrote:
> Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
> of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
> outside of the public forum (I must say I personally find that a shame
> -- all of the open source community can learn from th
Hi Etienne,
Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
outside of the public forum (I must say I personally find that a shame
-- all of the open source community can learn from things like this if
the
Hi Archie!
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 06:15:41PM -0600, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> >1- I do claim shared copyright on JCVM/JCHEVM. I do not and will not
> >back down from this.
> >
> >2- As far as I can tell from the above, both the ASF and Archie Cobbs
> >seem to agree to acknowl
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Hi Dalibor, Leo, and all,
Archie wrote:
3. So what do we do? My wish is to give SableVM the benefit of the
doubt. If there's something in there they claim is "theirs", we
can take it out and replace it. I'd rather do that than argue
about it. We sho
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
1- I do claim shared copyright on JCVM/JCHEVM. I do not and will not
back down from this.
2- As far as I can tell from the above, both the ASF and Archie Cobbs
seem to agree to acknowledge this shared copyright.
Um, I think I agree... so what is the practical import?
In
Dalibor Topic wrote:
On a Harmony-unrelated side note, if you are interested in seeing your
port in the Kaffe.org CVS tree, and your contract allows for it, feel
free to send me the patch. :)
On a harmony-related note, are you interested in looking at Weldon's
glue layer to see if Kaffe
Hi Dalibor, Leo, and all,
Archie wrote:
3. So what do we do? My wish is to give SableVM the benefit of the
doubt. If there's something in there they claim is "theirs", we
can take it out and replace it. I'd rather do that than argue
about it. We should remember that JCVM owe
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 09:04:49AM -0800, Leo Simons wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am not a laywer. I don't play one on TV, though I've played one on
> stage a few weeks ago.
>
> If I understand correctly, determining whether codebase A is a derivative
> work of codebase B is somewhat hard work. We
Hi everyone,
I am not a laywer. I don't play one on TV, though I've played one on
stage a few weeks ago.
If I understand correctly, determining whether codebase A is a derivative
work of codebase B is somewhat hard work. We have a codebase B in the
Harmony tree and a contributor to codebase A ass
On Monday 13 March 2006 15:22, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> On a Harmony-unrelated side note, if you are interested in seeing your
> port in the Kaffe.org CVS tree, and your contract allows for it, feel
> free to send me the patch. :)
I'm afraid it's lost in the mists of time, Dali - last century was a
Hi Chris,
A little clarification. I don't claim that you can't study another's
Free/Open Source (F/OS) VM source code, or that you can't contribute to
multiple VMs over time. I claim that this does not allow you to COPY
one VM's source code into another one without respecting the Copyright.
Mai
Chris Gray wrote:
>>The key change is "and that implementation is not available under a
>>recognized Open Source license" - because except for copying, which we
>>don't allow, any ideas found in open-source-licensed source code are not
>>trade secrets and therefore able to be re-implemented by oth
Geir,
> Note that the last snippet that you quote has been evolved to :
>
>If you have answered yes to any question above, and that
>implementation is not available under a recognized Open
>Source license, you may not be an contributor to the
>related component of Apache Harmony un
See below.
>> So, if the Harmony project has no problem acknowledging the shared
>> Copyright of SableVM authors on JCHEVM, I will get in touch with these
>> authors to get their consent to a license change.
>
> That's excellent! I see no problem with that. We traditionally give
> credit where
I'm about to run for the airport, but there's one thing I wished to
point you to just so there's no misunderstanding, and a comment...
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
[Message bounced->I subscribed->here it is...]
Hi Archie (and Harmony developers),
I see that the public discussion has actually start
[Message bounced->I subscribed->here it is...]
Hi Archie (and Harmony developers),
I see that the public discussion has actually started. I would have
rather liked to settle all this quietly. :-/
First, let me say that I admire the cleverness of Archie, when it comes
to develop code. I respe
25 matches
Mail list logo
