You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl> on 2013/10/02 11:27:47 UTC
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Darren,
Any update on the vmware patch? Did you get the patch tested already? Would be nice to get this in for the next release.
Cheers,
Hugo
On Sep 26, 2013, at 6:23 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Wow good guess...Hugo had me scratching my head on that one....Is Prussian some code name for Apache legal....Should I ask....Would it make me look stupid if I asked....all sorts of doubts going through my mind.
>>
>> --Alex
>>
>
> I think Prasanna just earned a new nickname thanks to autocorrect. :)
>
> --David
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <tr...@gmail.com>.
Let's not repeat the previous discussion. We allready agreed that the wsdl is the way forward. However we can't get any legal entity to say that it is ok to do so.
Hence my proposal to at least move forward even if it means to temporarily use vijava.
I really don't care what we do, as long as we have VMware in the regular build before the 4.4 feature freeze.
If anyone of you is willing to chase VMware legal on this, please have a go at it.
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> Suboptimal for?
> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the generated
> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>
>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>
>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>> open source alternative.
>>
>> --David
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
Where do we get the source code of vim25.jar the first place? VMware only
releases WSDL but not the java source, we can either copy it from vijava
or generate it ourselves to put it into our source repo, but if we do
generate, it would be easier to maintain the code base if this generation
step is also automatic and in our build scripts. I’m also fine to just put
the source code into CloudStack if we can always get it from somewhere
without a license issue
Kelven
On 2/18/14, 2:43 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
wrote:
>Why do we need the WSDL at all? Why can't we check in vim25 sources like
>the vijava project has done?
>
>On 2/18/14 2:42 PM, "Kelven Yang" <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>The reason why it ended up at noredist build is that the binary jars are
>>copied from VMware SDK, we are not sure about the license implication and
>>we don’t build it from source.
>>
>>In VMware 5.1 SDK, vim25.jar is generated from importing WSDL plus a
>>fix-up, the fix-up step is performed by a tool named
>>FixJaxWsWsdlResource. I disassembled the tool and found that it merely
>>replaces VimService.class resource search path before it compiles WSDL
>>generated java files.
>>
>>So technically, if there is not any license concerns, we can put all
>>these
>>into our build scripts, but before I go ahead to do that, someone has to
>>clear the legal concern of following steps
>>
>>1) include vim25.wsdl into CloudStack source code distribution
>>2) Include a fixup tool, not sure we can directly take it from VMware’s
>>SDK or is it a problem to rewrite it by us from license point of view.
>>3) Build script to produce a vim25.jar from CloudStack
>>
>>Kelven
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 2/18/14, 2:07 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
>>>
>>>mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
>>>-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25
>>>-Dversion=5.1
>>> -Dpackaging=jar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>>>>
>>>>--David
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> Not all.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim
>>>>>2
>>>>>5
>>>>>/
>>>>>mo
>>>>> /Alarm.java
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>>>>In example:
>>>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vi
>>>>>>m
>>>>>>2
>>>>>>5
>>>>>>/A
>>>>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>>>>vijava?
>>>>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled
>>>>>>>classes
>>>>>>>found
>>>>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information'
>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEG
>>>>>>>>>>>>A
>>>>>>>>>>>>L
>>>>>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an
>>>>>>>>>>>>alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>>>>><tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>license
>>>>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
On 2/18/14, 2:43 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
wrote:
>Why do we need the WSDL at all? Why can't we check in vim25 sources like
>the vijava project has done?
We don’t have the vim25 source directly, further investigation showed that
vijava actually uses a different Web service engine, even if we copy all
the vim25 source files from vijava, it will still be missing an important
file called VimService.java.
Further investigation showed that, the strange VMware fixup tool does
nothing at all, it has misled us to believe that we can’t use directly
generated vim25.jar, this is not true any more.
The conclusion is that we can use wsimport tool from JDK to directly
generate vim25.jar from WSDL and use it.
Kelven
>
>On 2/18/14 2:42 PM, "Kelven Yang" <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>The reason why it ended up at noredist build is that the binary jars are
>>copied from VMware SDK, we are not sure about the license implication and
>>we don’t build it from source.
>>
>>In VMware 5.1 SDK, vim25.jar is generated from importing WSDL plus a
>>fix-up, the fix-up step is performed by a tool named
>>FixJaxWsWsdlResource. I disassembled the tool and found that it merely
>>replaces VimService.class resource search path before it compiles WSDL
>>generated java files.
>>
>>So technically, if there is not any license concerns, we can put all
>>these
>>into our build scripts, but before I go ahead to do that, someone has to
>>clear the legal concern of following steps
>>
>>1) include vim25.wsdl into CloudStack source code distribution
>>2) Include a fixup tool, not sure we can directly take it from VMware’s
>>SDK or is it a problem to rewrite it by us from license point of view.
>>3) Build script to produce a vim25.jar from CloudStack
>>
>>Kelven
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 2/18/14, 2:07 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
>>>
>>>mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
>>>-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25
>>>-Dversion=5.1
>>> -Dpackaging=jar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>>>>
>>>>--David
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> Not all.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim
>>>>>2
>>>>>5
>>>>>/
>>>>>mo
>>>>> /Alarm.java
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>>>>In example:
>>>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vi
>>>>>>m
>>>>>>2
>>>>>>5
>>>>>>/A
>>>>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>>>>vijava?
>>>>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled
>>>>>>>classes
>>>>>>>found
>>>>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to
>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information'
>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEG
>>>>>>>>>>>>A
>>>>>>>>>>>>L
>>>>>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an
>>>>>>>>>>>>alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>>>>><tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>license
>>>>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Why do we need the WSDL at all? Why can't we check in vim25 sources like
the vijava project has done?
On 2/18/14 2:42 PM, "Kelven Yang" <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>The reason why it ended up at noredist build is that the binary jars are
>copied from VMware SDK, we are not sure about the license implication and
>we don’t build it from source.
>
>In VMware 5.1 SDK, vim25.jar is generated from importing WSDL plus a
>fix-up, the fix-up step is performed by a tool named
>FixJaxWsWsdlResource. I disassembled the tool and found that it merely
>replaces VimService.class resource search path before it compiles WSDL
>generated java files.
>
>So technically, if there is not any license concerns, we can put all these
>into our build scripts, but before I go ahead to do that, someone has to
>clear the legal concern of following steps
>
>1) include vim25.wsdl into CloudStack source code distribution
>2) Include a fixup tool, not sure we can directly take it from VMware’s
>SDK or is it a problem to rewrite it by us from license point of view.
>3) Build script to produce a vim25.jar from CloudStack
>
>Kelven
>
>
>
>
>On 2/18/14, 2:07 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>wrote:
>
>>If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
>>
>>mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
>>-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25 -Dversion=5.1
>> -Dpackaging=jar
>>
>>
>>
>>On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>>>
>>>--David
>>>
>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> Not all.
>>>>
>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim2
>>>>5
>>>>/
>>>>mo
>>>> /Alarm.java
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>>>
>>>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>>>In example:
>>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim
>>>>>2
>>>>>5
>>>>>/A
>>>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>>>
>>>>>--David
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>>>vijava?
>>>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>>>>>found
>>>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to
>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGA
>>>>>>>>>>>L
>>>>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an
>>>>>>>>>>>alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>>>>><tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in
>>>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF
>>>>>>>>>>>>license
>>>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang
>>>>>>>>>>>>><ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>>CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
The reason why it ended up at noredist build is that the binary jars are
copied from VMware SDK, we are not sure about the license implication and
we don’t build it from source.
In VMware 5.1 SDK, vim25.jar is generated from importing WSDL plus a
fix-up, the fix-up step is performed by a tool named
FixJaxWsWsdlResource. I disassembled the tool and found that it merely
replaces VimService.class resource search path before it compiles WSDL
generated java files.
So technically, if there is not any license concerns, we can put all these
into our build scripts, but before I go ahead to do that, someone has to
clear the legal concern of following steps
1) include vim25.wsdl into CloudStack source code distribution
2) Include a fixup tool, not sure we can directly take it from VMware’s
SDK or is it a problem to rewrite it by us from license point of view.
3) Build script to produce a vim25.jar from CloudStack
Kelven
On 2/18/14, 2:07 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
wrote:
>If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
>
>mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
>-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25 -Dversion=5.1
> -Dpackaging=jar
>
>
>
>On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>>
>>--David
>>
>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Not all.
>>>
>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25
>>>/
>>>mo
>>> /Alarm.java
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>>
>>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>>In example:
>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim2
>>>>5
>>>>/A
>>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>>
>>>>--David
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>>vijava?
>>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>>>>found
>>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL
>>>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an
>>>>>>>>>>alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in
>>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang
>>>>>>>>>>>><ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside
>>>>>>>>>>>>CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to
>>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
We don't know that it is. We know the vim25.jar is distributed to us
from the vmware SDK with different licensing.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
<Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
>
> mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
> -DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25 -Dversion=5.1
> -Dpackaging=jar
>
>
>
> On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>>
>>--David
>>
>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Not all.
>>>
>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/
>>>mo
>>> /Alarm.java
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>>
>>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>>In example:
>>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25
>>>>/A
>>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>>
>>>>--David
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>>vijava?
>>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>>>>found
>>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>>
>>>>>>--David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-
>>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in
>>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to
>>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist?
mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar
-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25 -Dversion=5.1
-Dpackaging=jar
On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
>
>--David
>
>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> Not all.
>>
>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/
>>mo
>> /Alarm.java
>>
>>
>> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>>
>>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>>In example:
>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25
>>>/A
>>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>>
>>>--David
>>>
>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>>vijava?
>>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>>>found
>>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>>
>>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>>
>>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>>
>>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>>
>>>>>--David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to
>>>>>>this
>>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>>perhaps
>>>>>> they will pick
>>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-
>>>>>>>>>18
>>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in
>>>>>>>>>>our
>>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package
>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support
>>>>>>>>>>>co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to
>>>>>>>>>>>put
>>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file)
--David
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
<Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Not all.
> http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/mo
> /Alarm.java
>
>
> On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>>
>>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>>In example:
>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/A
>>gentInstallFailed.java
>>
>>--David
>>
>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>>vijava?
>>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>>found
>>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>>
>>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>
>>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>>
>>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>>
>>>>--David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
>>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>>
>>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>>perhaps
>>>>> they will pick
>>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>>> 3. ?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-18
>>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that
>>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence
>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them
>>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Not all.
http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/mo
/Alarm.java
On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
>doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
>
>WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
>header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
>In example:
>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/A
>gentInstallFailed.java
>
>--David
>
>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
>> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to
>>vijava?
>> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes
>>found
>> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>>
>> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>
>>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>>
>>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>>
>>>--David
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
>>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>>
>>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options,
>>>>perhaps
>>>> they will pick
>>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>>> 3. ?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chiradeep
>>>>
>>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>>
>>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>>Hugo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers"
>>>>>><HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-18
>>>>>>>0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that
>>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service
>>>>>>>>>stubs
>>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP
>>>>>>>>>toolkit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be
>>>>>>>>>>>distributed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence
>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state
>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them
>>>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still
doesn't fix the problem for us and our users.
WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright
header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD.
In example: http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/AgentInstallFailed.java
--David
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
<Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to vijava?
> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes found
> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
>
>
> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
>
> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>
>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>>
>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>>
>>--David
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
>>> question on the VMWare side).
>>>
>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options, perhaps
>>> they will pick
>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>>> 3. ?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chiradeep
>>>
>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Chiradeep,
>>>>
>>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>Hugo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that
>>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs
>>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence
>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that
>>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest.
On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to vijava?
I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes found
in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary.
[1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/
On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
>a Cat A or Cat B license.
>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>
>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
>MIT or BSD if going that route)
>
>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
>phonebook analogy plays well there.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
>
>--David
>
>
>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
>> question on the VMWare side).
>>
>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options, perhaps
>> they will pick
>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
>> 3. ?
>>
>> --
>> Chiradeep
>>
>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>
>>>Chiradeep,
>>>
>>>Whats the progress on this?
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Hugo
>>>
>>>
>>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal
>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>>>>>
>>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>>Kelven,
>>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>>policy?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that
>>>>>>>have
>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs
>>>>>>>from
>>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>>> generating
>>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed
>>>>>>>visit
>>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>><Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that
>>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client
>>>>>>>>>>libraries?
>>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when
>>>>>>>>>>>there
>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be
a Cat A or Cat B license.
https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose
MIT or BSD if going that route)
#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I
can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense
technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or
even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an
element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the
phonebook analogy plays well there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural
--David
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
<Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
> question on the VMWare side).
>
> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options, perhaps
> they will pick
> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
> 3. ?
>
> --
> Chiradeep
>
> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>
>>Chiradeep,
>>
>>Whats the progress on this?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Hugo
>>
>>
>>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>>
>>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>>
>>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>>>>
>>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>>Kelven,
>>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>>
>>>> Hugo
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>>
>>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>>policy?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs
>>>>>>from
>>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>>> generating
>>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
>>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>>WSDL
>>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
>>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it
>>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there
>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this
question on the VMWare side).
What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options, perhaps
they will pick
1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo
2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL
3. ?
--
Chiradeep
On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>Chiradeep,
>
>Whats the progress on this?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Hugo
>
>
>On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>>
>> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>>
>>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>>>
>>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative.
>>>Kelven,
>>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>>
>>> Hugo
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>>
>>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license
>>>>policy?
>>>>
>>>> Hugo
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have
>>>>> been
>>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed:
>>>>>vim.jar,
>>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs
>>>>>from
>>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>>> generating
>>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
>>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put
>>>>>WSDL
>>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>>
>>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
>>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it
>>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't
>>>>>>>>>>include
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there
>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>>
>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl>.
Chiradeep,
Whats the progress on this?
Cheers,
Hugo
On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
>
> On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>>
>> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>>
>> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative. Kelven,
>> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>>
>> Hugo
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>>
>>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license policy?
>>>
>>> Hugo
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have
>>>> been
>>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar,
>>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from
>>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>>
>>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>> generating
>>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
>>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>>
>>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL
>>>> generation process to maven build
>>>>
>>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
>>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Apparently we can
>>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it
>>>>>> is ok
>>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>>> already.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>>> generated
>>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>> business of
>>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there
>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --David
>>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt
On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
wrote:
>We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
>
>This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion:
>https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
>
>Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative. Kelven,
>Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
>
>Hugo
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>>
>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our
>>notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license policy?
>>
>> Hugo
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have
>>>been
>>> designated as ³distributable code².
>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar,
>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from
>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>>
>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>>
>>>
>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that
>>>generating
>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>>
>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL
>>> generation process to maven build
>>>
>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apparently we can
>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>>
>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it
>>>>>is ok
>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>>> already.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hugo
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>>> generated
>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the
>>>>>>>business of
>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there
>>>>>>>is a
>>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --David
>>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was.
This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion: https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180
Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative. Kelven, Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket?
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Kelven, Chiradeep,
>
> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license policy?
>
> Hugo
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have been
>> designated as ³distributable code².
>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar,
>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from
>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>>
>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>>
>>
>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that generating
>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>>
>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL
>> generation process to maven build
>>
>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Apparently we can
>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Chiradeep,
>>>>
>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it is ok
>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>>> already.
>>>>
>>>> Hugo
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>>> generated
>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --David
>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <tr...@gmail.com>.
Kelven, Chiradeep,
What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license policy?
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have been
> designated as ³distributable code².
> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar,
> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from
> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>
>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
>
>
> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that generating
> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
>
> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL
> generation process to maven build
>
> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
>
>
>
> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Apparently we can
>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>>
>>
>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Chiradeep,
>>>
>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it is ok
>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>> already.
>>>
>>> Hugo
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>>> <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Suboptimal for?
>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>> generated
>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>>> <ch...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>> --David
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code?
A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have been
designated as ³distributable code².
In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar,
vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from
the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit.
>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed.
Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that generating
our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of
different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack.
If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL
generation process to maven build
For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit
http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info
On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <Ch...@citrix.com>
wrote:
>Apparently we can
>https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
>http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
>
>
>On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Chiradeep,
>>
>>Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it is ok
>>to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in
>>already.
>>
>>Hugo
>>
>>Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Suboptimal for?
>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the
>>>generated
>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>>><ch...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include
>>>>>the
>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>>>> open source alternative.
>>>>
>>>> --David
>>>
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Apparently we can
https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983
http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7
On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Chiradeep,
>
>Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it is ok
>to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in already.
>
>Hugo
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal
>><Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> Suboptimal for?
>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the generated
>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>>
>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers
>>><ch...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>>
>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>>> open source alternative.
>>>
>>> --David
>>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <tr...@gmail.com>.
Chiradeep,
Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it is ok to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in already.
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> Suboptimal for?
> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the generated
> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
>
>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
>>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>
>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>> open source alternative.
>>
>> --David
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Suboptimal for?
Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries?
Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the generated
sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources.
On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>
>wrote:
>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
>> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>>
>
>Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
>producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
>non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
>open source alternative.
>
>--David
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org> wrote:
> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
> WSDL in our repo / distro.
>
Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the business of
producing open source software. Depending on non-free and
non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there is a
open source alternative.
--David
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@apache.org>.
I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use
something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include the
WSDL in our repo / distro.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:40 AM, Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
> Heya,
>
> Does anyone know about the current status the legal discussions around including the WSDL or code generated by parsing the WSDL?
>
> I would really like to have the vmware support in the normal build instead of just in the noredist build. It would probably boost adoption amongst people using vmware. I’m at a point where i’m about to just commit a change to use vijava so we can do it. I’d rather revert that change later when the legal issues are sorted then wait another release before we have vmware support in the normal build. We already missed the 4.3 release, let’s make sure its fixed in 4.4.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> On 4 okt. 2013, at 19:04, Darren Shepherd <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-180 for this.
>>
>> Darren
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
Hugo,
I think we seems to come to a census that to use WSDL to generate the java
stub which is pretty much compatible to what we have right now.
Kelven
On 1/21/14, 12:40 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>Heya,
>
>Does anyone know about the current status the legal discussions around
>including the WSDL or code generated by parsing the WSDL?
>
>I would really like to have the vmware support in the normal build
>instead of just in the noredist build. It would probably boost adoption
>amongst people using vmware. I¹m at a point where i¹m about to just
>commit a change to use vijava so we can do it. I¹d rather revert that
>change later when the legal issues are sorted then wait another release
>before we have vmware support in the normal build. We already missed the
>4.3 release, let¹s make sure its fixed in 4.4.
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Hugo
>
>
>On 4 okt. 2013, at 19:04, Darren Shepherd <da...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-180 for this.
>>
>> Darren
>
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl>.
Heya,
Does anyone know about the current status the legal discussions around including the WSDL or code generated by parsing the WSDL?
I would really like to have the vmware support in the normal build instead of just in the noredist build. It would probably boost adoption amongst people using vmware. I’m at a point where i’m about to just commit a change to use vijava so we can do it. I’d rather revert that change later when the legal issues are sorted then wait another release before we have vmware support in the normal build. We already missed the 4.3 release, let’s make sure its fixed in 4.4.
Cheers,
Hugo
On 4 okt. 2013, at 19:04, Darren Shepherd <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-180 for this.
>
> Darren
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Darren Shepherd <da...@gmail.com>.
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-180 for this.
Darren
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Darren Shepherd
<da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No update on this. I mentally got blocked on the emailing legal@
> about it. Should I go ahead and email them? Whats the full email
> address? From a technical perspective I know this will work, I did
> some bytecode analysis and we can produce basically the exact same
> thing as what's in the jar today. So its just a legal question in my
> mind. So I didn't want to waste anybodies time if legal is going to
> say no.
>
Legal has in the past said it depends - so we won't know til you ask.
Anytime resources are referenced as $something@ here at the ASF - you
can generally assume postpending apache.org to that will get you to
the right place. Except in this case legal-discuss@apache.org is the
list you want, and you probably want to actually file a Jira ticket
for it, so Sam and others will see the constant tickler.
You may want to look at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-137 which is another
WSDL-related issue.
Re: VmWare SDK to vijava
Posted by Darren Shepherd <da...@gmail.com>.
No update on this. I mentally got blocked on the emailing legal@
about it. Should I go ahead and email them? Whats the full email
address? From a technical perspective I know this will work, I did
some bytecode analysis and we can produce basically the exact same
thing as what's in the jar today. So its just a legal question in my
mind. So I didn't want to waste anybodies time if legal is going to
say no.
Darren
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Hugo Trippaers <hu...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
> Darren,
>
> Any update on the vmware patch? Did you get the patch tested already? Would be nice to get this in for the next release.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 6:23 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> Wow good guess...Hugo had me scratching my head on that one....Is Prussian some code name for Apache legal....Should I ask....Would it make me look stupid if I asked....all sorts of doubts going through my mind.
>>>
>>> --Alex
>>>
>>
>> I think Prasanna just earned a new nickname thanks to autocorrect. :)
>>
>> --David
>