You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Lasantha Ranaweera <la...@opensource.lk> on 2006/11/02 11:48:07 UTC
License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Hi All,
Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration" in
following url:
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Hi Lasantha,
I'm reviewing it now. I worked on this article and at that time did not pay attention to this license issue. In fact, the earlier releases of these sample had no license at all.
There are about 3 samples in the same situation, I would encourage you to continue with the other samples until I found an appropriate solution to this issue.
The other samples have no license headers so we should add some and also clean some of the original comments in the src code that were more for our own tracking purposes.
Thanks a lot for helping out updating these samples.
Cheers!
Hernan
Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not. :-\
>
> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>> in following url:
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>
>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>
>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /*****************************************************************
> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
> *
> * Date Version Author Changes
> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
> *
> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
> * All rights reserved.
> *****************************************************************/
>
> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>
> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>
> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>
> /**
> * Business logic stateless bean.
> *
> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless" view-type="remote"
> */
> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>
> /** Serial version uid. */
> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>
> /**
> * @ejb.interface-method
> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
> *
> * @return result message
> */
> public String upload() {
> return "File successfully uploaded";
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
> */
> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
> RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * Create method.
> *
> * @ejb.create-method
> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
> *
> * @throws EJBException
> * @throws RemoteException
> */
> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
> */
> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
> */
> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
>
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
> */
> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
> }
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Lasantha Ranaweera <la...@opensource.lk>.
Hi Hernan,
Actually here I am missed something here. So first of all apologies for
that. Regarding this issue I have contacted somebody who knows open
source than me. He explained me that I can edit this source code without
any issue, since you have granted me that ability as the author. In
that case Kevin's argument is more of theoretical than practical one. Am
I correct?
If you need I can go ahead with the editing for you :-) . Sorry for
dragging this issue so much.
Now I am learning about open source licenses. ;-)
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
Hernan Cunico wrote:
> As I said, I worked with other folks on those samples and I submitted
> the patch into JIRA granting ASL, that's why I asked you if you could
> fix the headers in the docs you were updating. I wasn't asking for
> anything weird as you suggested in a previous email, but you're right,
> I should probably go fix all those src myself.
>
> I will work on a doc about granting license to ASF for all the docs
> and attachments and put a link on Geronimo's cwiki homepage. The
> license issue does not apply only to the samples but to the doc and
> images altogether.
>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
> lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
>> If those sample are added with JIRA then it won't be that much of big
>> problem because contributor knows it goes under ASL. I thought it might
>> have added as the current way of confluence itself. Even though it might
>> not add the license information to the source code I think it is very
>> important to let the contributor know that they are donating their
>> materials under ASL. JIRA handles that issue atleast ;).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>
>>> Lasantha,
>>> I either wrote or co-authored all those docs and the headers in
>>> question
>>> skipped my attention at that time.
>>> I know for sure they were not there in the first releases of those
>>> samples
>>> as we were developing them. Apparently those headers were added at a
>>> later
>>> time.
>>>
>>> Either way those samples as well as the entire documentation were made
>>> available in JIRA GERONIMO-1357 granting ASL to all the content. But
>>> clicking the ASL check box in JIRA does not add any license info to the
>>> attached files.
>>>
>>> As for Confluence itself, in the autoexported version you can read
>>> at the
>>> bottom of each page "Copyright © 2003-2006, The Apache Software
>>> Foundation". Maybe this is not enough.
>>>
>>> Confluence is just a wiki and there is no way (without major
>>> surgery) to
>>> modify the "attachments" page so we can click an ASL check box. Even if
>>> there is one there would be no chance to add any ASL related info to
>>> the
>>> actual files.
>>>
>>> I don't know what the solution would be so I'm open to suggestions.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>> Hernan
>>>
>>> lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
>>>> Hi Hernan,
>>>>
>>>> I can't add those modifications to the samples with propriety
>>>> licenses,
>>>> you know it is not illegal and ethical :(. Sure I can add this Apache
>>>> licence to the samples I had written.
>>>>
>>>> Also one more question. Can I add this license to other existing
>>>> samples?
>>>> Somewhere I heard we can't change the distributed license to any other
>>>> license. Confluence is bit different than JIRA, nobody accepts ASF
>>>> licences before their commiting. I haven't come across this
>>>> situation at
>>>> all. Please help.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>
>>>>> Lasantha,
>>>>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only
>>>>> display
>>>>> ASF2 license.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>>>>
>>>>> <!--
>>>>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>
>>>>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>>>>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>>>>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
>>>>> software
>>>>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>>>>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>>>>> implied.
>>>>> See the License for the specific language governing
>>>>> permissions and
>>>>> limitations under the License.
>>>>> -->
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments
>>>>> and add
>>>>> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you
>>>>> are
>>>>> updating.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for taking care of this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>> Hernan
>>>>>
>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look
>>>>>> at the
>>>>>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>> :-\
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo
>>>>>>> samples
>>>>>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>>>>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found
>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>>>>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security
>>>>>>> Migration"
>>>>>>> in following url:
>>>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>>>>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*****************************************************************
>>>>>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Date Version Author Changes
>>>>>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>>>>>> * All rights reserved.
>>>>>> *****************************************************************/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>>>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>>>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>>>>>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>>>>>> view-type="remote"
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /** Serial version uid. */
>>>>>> private static final long serialVersionUID =
>>>>>> 4688250533090120601L;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * @ejb.interface-method
>>>>>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * @return result message
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public String upload() {
>>>>>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * @see
>>>>>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws
>>>>>> EJBException,
>>>>>> RemoteException {
>>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * Create method.
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * @ejb.create-method
>>>>>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> * @throws EJBException
>>>>>> * @throws RemoteException
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /**
>>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException,
>>>>>> RemoteException {
>>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
As I said, I worked with other folks on those samples and I submitted the patch into JIRA granting ASL, that's why I asked you if you could fix the headers in the docs you were updating. I wasn't asking for anything weird as you suggested in a previous email, but you're right, I should probably go fix all those src myself.
I will work on a doc about granting license to ASF for all the docs and attachments and put a link on Geronimo's cwiki homepage. The license issue does not apply only to the samples but to the doc and images altogether.
Cheers!
Hernan
lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
> If those sample are added with JIRA then it won't be that much of big
> problem because contributor knows it goes under ASL. I thought it might
> have added as the current way of confluence itself. Even though it might
> not add the license information to the source code I think it is very
> important to let the contributor know that they are donating their
> materials under ASL. JIRA handles that issue atleast ;).
>
> Thanks,
> Lasantha Ranaweera
>
>> Lasantha,
>> I either wrote or co-authored all those docs and the headers in question
>> skipped my attention at that time.
>> I know for sure they were not there in the first releases of those samples
>> as we were developing them. Apparently those headers were added at a later
>> time.
>>
>> Either way those samples as well as the entire documentation were made
>> available in JIRA GERONIMO-1357 granting ASL to all the content. But
>> clicking the ASL check box in JIRA does not add any license info to the
>> attached files.
>>
>> As for Confluence itself, in the autoexported version you can read at the
>> bottom of each page "Copyright © 2003-2006, The Apache Software
>> Foundation". Maybe this is not enough.
>>
>> Confluence is just a wiki and there is no way (without major surgery) to
>> modify the "attachments" page so we can click an ASL check box. Even if
>> there is one there would be no chance to add any ASL related info to the
>> actual files.
>>
>> I don't know what the solution would be so I'm open to suggestions.
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Hernan
>>
>> lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
>>> Hi Hernan,
>>>
>>> I can't add those modifications to the samples with propriety licenses,
>>> you know it is not illegal and ethical :(. Sure I can add this Apache
>>> licence to the samples I had written.
>>>
>>> Also one more question. Can I add this license to other existing
>>> samples?
>>> Somewhere I heard we can't change the distributed license to any other
>>> license. Confluence is bit different than JIRA, nobody accepts ASF
>>> licences before their commiting. I haven't come across this situation at
>>> all. Please help.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>
>>>> Lasantha,
>>>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
>>>> ASF2 license.
>>>>
>>>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>>>
>>>> <!--
>>>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>
>>>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>>>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>>>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>>>
>>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>>
>>>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>>>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>>>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>>>> implied.
>>>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>>>> limitations under the License.
>>>> -->
>>>>
>>>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
>>>> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
>>>> updating.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for taking care of this.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers!
>>>> Hernan
>>>>
>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>>>>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>>>>> :-\
>>>>>
>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>>>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>>>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>>>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>>>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>>>>> in following url:
>>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>>>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>>>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> /*****************************************************************
>>>>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Date Version Author Changes
>>>>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>>>>> * All rights reserved.
>>>>> *****************************************************************/
>>>>>
>>>>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>>>>
>>>>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>>>>
>>>>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>>>>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>>>>> view-type="remote"
>>>>> */
>>>>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>>>>
>>>>> /** Serial version uid. */
>>>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * @ejb.interface-method
>>>>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>>>>> *
>>>>> * @return result message
>>>>> */
>>>>> public String upload() {
>>>>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * @see
>>>>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>>>>> */
>>>>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws
>>>>> EJBException,
>>>>> RemoteException {
>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * Create method.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * @ejb.create-method
>>>>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>>>>> *
>>>>> * @throws EJBException
>>>>> * @throws RemoteException
>>>>> */
>>>>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>>>>> */
>>>>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>>>>> */
>>>>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>>>>> */
>>>>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by la...@opensource.lk.
If those sample are added with JIRA then it won't be that much of big
problem because contributor knows it goes under ASL. I thought it might
have added as the current way of confluence itself. Even though it might
not add the license information to the source code I think it is very
important to let the contributor know that they are donating their
materials under ASL. JIRA handles that issue atleast ;).
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
> Lasantha,
> I either wrote or co-authored all those docs and the headers in question
> skipped my attention at that time.
> I know for sure they were not there in the first releases of those samples
> as we were developing them. Apparently those headers were added at a later
> time.
>
> Either way those samples as well as the entire documentation were made
> available in JIRA GERONIMO-1357 granting ASL to all the content. But
> clicking the ASL check box in JIRA does not add any license info to the
> attached files.
>
> As for Confluence itself, in the autoexported version you can read at the
> bottom of each page "Copyright © 2003-2006, The Apache Software
> Foundation". Maybe this is not enough.
>
> Confluence is just a wiki and there is no way (without major surgery) to
> modify the "attachments" page so we can click an ASL check box. Even if
> there is one there would be no chance to add any ASL related info to the
> actual files.
>
> I don't know what the solution would be so I'm open to suggestions.
>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
> lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
>> Hi Hernan,
>>
>> I can't add those modifications to the samples with propriety licenses,
>> you know it is not illegal and ethical :(. Sure I can add this Apache
>> licence to the samples I had written.
>>
>> Also one more question. Can I add this license to other existing
>> samples?
>> Somewhere I heard we can't change the distributed license to any other
>> license. Confluence is bit different than JIRA, nobody accepts ASF
>> licences before their commiting. I haven't come across this situation at
>> all. Please help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>
>>> Lasantha,
>>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
>>> ASF2 license.
>>>
>>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>>
>>> <!--
>>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>
>>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>
>>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>>> implied.
>>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>>> limitations under the License.
>>> -->
>>>
>>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
>>> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
>>> updating.
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking care of this.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>> Hernan
>>>
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>>>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>>>> :-\
>>>>
>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>>>> in following url:
>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>>>
>>>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> /*****************************************************************
>>>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>>>> *
>>>> * Date Version Author Changes
>>>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>>>> *
>>>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>>>> * All rights reserved.
>>>> *****************************************************************/
>>>>
>>>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>>>
>>>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>>>
>>>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>>>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>>>> *
>>>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>>>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>>>> view-type="remote"
>>>> */
>>>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>>>
>>>> /** Serial version uid. */
>>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * @ejb.interface-method
>>>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>>>> *
>>>> * @return result message
>>>> */
>>>> public String upload() {
>>>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * @see
>>>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>>>> */
>>>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws
>>>> EJBException,
>>>> RemoteException {
>>>> // Nothing...
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * Create method.
>>>> *
>>>> * @ejb.create-method
>>>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>>>> *
>>>> * @throws EJBException
>>>> * @throws RemoteException
>>>> */
>>>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>> // Nothing...
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>>>> */
>>>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>> // Nothing...
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>>>> */
>>>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>> // Nothing...
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>>>> */
>>>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>>> // Nothing...
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>
>>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Lasantha,
I either wrote or co-authored all those docs and the headers in question skipped my attention at that time.
I know for sure they were not there in the first releases of those samples as we were developing them. Apparently those headers were added at a later time.
Either way those samples as well as the entire documentation were made available in JIRA GERONIMO-1357 granting ASL to all the content. But clicking the ASL check box in JIRA does not add any license info to the attached files.
As for Confluence itself, in the autoexported version you can read at the bottom of each page "Copyright © 2003-2006, The Apache Software Foundation". Maybe this is not enough.
Confluence is just a wiki and there is no way (without major surgery) to modify the "attachments" page so we can click an ASL check box. Even if there is one there would be no chance to add any ASL related info to the actual files.
I don't know what the solution would be so I'm open to suggestions.
Cheers!
Hernan
lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
> Hi Hernan,
>
> I can't add those modifications to the samples with propriety licenses,
> you know it is not illegal and ethical :(. Sure I can add this Apache
> licence to the samples I had written.
>
> Also one more question. Can I add this license to other existing samples?
> Somewhere I heard we can't change the distributed license to any other
> license. Confluence is bit different than JIRA, nobody accepts ASF
> licences before their commiting. I haven't come across this situation at
> all. Please help.
>
> Thanks,
> Lasantha Ranaweera
>
>> Lasantha,
>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
>> ASF2 license.
>>
>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>
>> <!--
>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>
>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>> implied.
>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>> limitations under the License.
>> -->
>>
>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
>> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
>> updating.
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>>
>> Thanks for taking care of this.
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Hernan
>>
>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>>> :-\
>>>
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>>> in following url:
>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>>
>>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> /*****************************************************************
>>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>>> *
>>> * Date Version Author Changes
>>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>>> *
>>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>>> * All rights reserved.
>>> *****************************************************************/
>>>
>>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>>
>>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>>
>>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>>> *
>>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>>> view-type="remote"
>>> */
>>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>>
>>> /** Serial version uid. */
>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @ejb.interface-method
>>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>>> *
>>> * @return result message
>>> */
>>> public String upload() {
>>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see
>>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>>> */
>>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
>>> RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Create method.
>>> *
>>> * @ejb.create-method
>>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>>> *
>>> * @throws EJBException
>>> * @throws RemoteException
>>> */
>>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>> }
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by la...@opensource.lk.
Hi Hernan,
I can't add those modifications to the samples with propriety licenses,
you know it is not illegal and ethical :(. Sure I can add this Apache
licence to the samples I had written.
Also one more question. Can I add this license to other existing samples?
Somewhere I heard we can't change the distributed license to any other
license. Confluence is bit different than JIRA, nobody accepts ASF
licences before their commiting. I haven't come across this situation at
all. Please help.
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
> Lasantha,
> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
> ASF2 license.
>
> This is the text we have in trunk today
>
> <!--
> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
> implied.
> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> limitations under the License.
> -->
>
> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
> updating.
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>
> Thanks for taking care of this.
>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>> :-\
>>
>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>> in following url:
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>
>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>
>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> /*****************************************************************
>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>> *
>> * Date Version Author Changes
>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>> *
>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>> * All rights reserved.
>> *****************************************************************/
>>
>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>
>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>
>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>
>> /**
>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>> *
>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>> view-type="remote"
>> */
>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>
>> /** Serial version uid. */
>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>
>> /**
>> * @ejb.interface-method
>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>> *
>> * @return result message
>> */
>> public String upload() {
>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see
>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>> */
>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
>> RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * Create method.
>> *
>> * @ejb.create-method
>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>> *
>> * @throws EJBException
>> * @throws RemoteException
>> */
>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>> */
>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>> */
>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>>
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>> */
>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>> }
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by la...@opensource.lk.
Hi Kevan,
Thanks for your description. It cleared some of my doubts regarding this
issue.
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
>
> On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
>
>> Lasantha,
>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only
>> display ASF2 license.
>>
>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>
>> <!--
>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>
>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>> implied.
>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>> limitations under the License.
>> -->
>>
>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and
>> add the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples
>> you are updating.
>
> Lasantha should not be *removing* copyright statements from a source
> file. The copyright holder should do that (i.e. someone from ibm). In
> this case, it sounds like that has already been done. If that's true,
> then Lasantha should just pick up the latest source.
>
> FYI, http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html contains the
> current policy regarding source headers/license/copyright info.
> Source headers should not contain copyright statements and the
> license text has been updated.
>
> Lasantha,
> Thanks for identifying this issue.
>
> --kevan
>
>
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
do we have a script to add the license info automatically that I could use for the samples?
Cheers!
Hernan
Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
>
>> Lasantha,
>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only
>> display ASF2 license.
>>
>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>
>> <!--
>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>
>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>> implied.
>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>> limitations under the License.
>> -->
>>
>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and
>> add the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you
>> are updating.
>
> Lasantha should not be *removing* copyright statements from a source
> file. The copyright holder should do that (i.e. someone from ibm). In
> this case, it sounds like that has already been done. If that's true,
> then Lasantha should just pick up the latest source.
>
> FYI, http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html contains the current
> policy regarding source headers/license/copyright info. Source headers
> should not contain copyright statements and the license text has been
> updated.
>
> Lasantha,
> Thanks for identifying this issue.
>
> --kevan
>
>
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Nov 2, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
> Lasantha,
> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only
> display ASF2 license.
>
> This is the text we have in trunk today
>
> <!--
> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
> implied.
> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> limitations under the License.
> -->
>
> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and
> add the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples
> you are updating.
Lasantha should not be *removing* copyright statements from a source
file. The copyright holder should do that (i.e. someone from ibm). In
this case, it sounds like that has already been done. If that's true,
then Lasantha should just pick up the latest source.
FYI, http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html contains the
current policy regarding source headers/license/copyright info.
Source headers should not contain copyright statements and the
license text has been updated.
Lasantha,
Thanks for identifying this issue.
--kevan
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
> Hi Hernan,
>
> I felt this is yet another issue created by confluence. That is because
> people can contribute to the Geronimo project not accepting ASF licenses.
> If the contributors are working with the JIRA then they have to accept ASF
> license with each and every patch (if they like to contribute to the
> project). Is there any way to give this functionality to the confluence
As I said in an earlier note, clicking a checkbox will not address the issue of having some files with some pre-existing "license" or "credits" information.
> too? Anyway I am not a fan of confluence than JIRA to get contributions to
> an open source project, hear are my points regarding it (may be this
> horse has been beaten to dead several times by this same community ;-) ).
Not to dead, looks like it's still kicking ;-)
>
> First I will start from it's positives. Yeah I accept it will give very
> nice presentation to the users with some very good inbuilt capabilities
> (pdf export etc etc).
>
> The point I am against here is using it directly to get the user
> contributions. Here are some the points come to my mind.
That's exactly the point for using a wiki, so everybody can contribute. "Collaboration"
>
> 1. License issues like above might occur because of the contributors are
> not accepting ASF licenses. Also it will not promote the ASF licenses. I
> think you all will understand the importance of ASF licenses to the open
> source community.
There should not be any licensing related issues, we are talking about documentation. I grant that a vast majority of the "articles" in the documentation contain some sort of examples and most of those examples are also available as attachments.
I would not be happy if we need to change the current method for contributing to the doc with a more strict one (i.e. restricted edit access) so we can avoid this kind of issues. That will, IMO, make it even harder for new contributors trying to provide some docs.
> (This is one of the major promotion slogans of Geronimo too ;-) )
> 2. Visibility of the work done in the confluence is limited to a very few
> developers because most of the developers are working with the JIRA. I am
> not sure this is the best way to handle a community driven project like
> Geronimo.
Not sure I follow what you are saying "...visibility of the work done in the confluence is limited..."
I think the wiki has more visibility than any other media. Can you expand a bit more
> 3. Nobody is going to create JIRA issues regarding documentation issues.
> So according to my understanding documentation will not improve from
> starting. There is noway to submit a patches to the existing bugs of the
> documentation (then we might have to get the help of JIRA).
Using JIRA is not going to enhance nor leverage more community building around the documentation. However it may help to track some articles and its versions but there will be no revisions in sync with the current Confluence content.
Again, not sure I understand your concern about "...documentation will not improve from starting..." You don't need an issue tracking system to get feedback on the documentation. There are a lot of folks chiming in and either send an email with comments or go directly to the wiki and fix some typos for example. That's the beauty of the wiki, everybody can collaborate and contribute improve the documentation.
> 4. I am sure people like tech writers, graphic editors, translators etc.
> are part of an open source project contributors (I heard some of the
> Apache members start their work as tech writers). In this kind of
> environment they will not get the credit they deserve too.
Now this is the horse we beat to dead ;-) we have had endless discussions about this subject over a long period of time and I think we tried every possible recipe available. If you are concerned about the visibility of the articles you contribute then I would encourage you to do the same thing you would do if you were posting the same article anywhere else. Talk about it, let us (the community) know what you've worked on. Don't let an automatic email do it for you, it would probably get filtered ;-)
HTH
Cheers!
Hernan
>
> Comments !!!!
>
> Thanks,
> Lasantha Ranaweera
>
>> Lasantha,
>> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
>> ASF2 license.
>>
>> This is the text we have in trunk today
>>
>> <!--
>> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>
>> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
>> implied.
>> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>> limitations under the License.
>> -->
>>
>> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
>> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
>> updating.
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>>
>> Thanks for taking care of this.
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Hernan
>>
>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>>> :-\
>>>
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>>> in following url:
>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>>
>>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> /*****************************************************************
>>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>>> *
>>> * Date Version Author Changes
>>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>>> *
>>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>>> * All rights reserved.
>>> *****************************************************************/
>>>
>>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>>
>>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>>
>>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>>> *
>>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>>> view-type="remote"
>>> */
>>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>>
>>> /** Serial version uid. */
>>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @ejb.interface-method
>>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>>> *
>>> * @return result message
>>> */
>>> public String upload() {
>>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see
>>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>>> */
>>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
>>> RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * Create method.
>>> *
>>> * @ejb.create-method
>>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>>> *
>>> * @throws EJBException
>>> * @throws RemoteException
>>> */
>>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>>> */
>>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>>> // Nothing...
>>> }
>>> }
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
I think you pretty much nailed it, thanks ;-)
I'll work on something and put a link on the Geronimo cwiki home page (we can't cover all the pages)
Cheers!
Hernan
Jay D. McHugh wrote:
> lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
>> 1. License issues like above might occur because of the contributors are
>> not accepting ASF licenses. Also it will not promote the ASF licenses. I
>> think you all will understand the importance of ASF licenses to the open
>> source community.
> I may be wrong, but I think the issue of license on content added to the
> wiki came up before and it was stated that content added to wiki is (by
> the nature of wikis) automatically freely available to everyone for any
> use.
>
> It may be a good idea to put an official license policy onto the wiki
> though. That way, there should hopefully not be any future questions
> about permissible use to it's content or the license that applies.
> Here is an excerpt from the license/copyright page from Wikipedia
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights):
>
> <excerpt>
> Contributors' rights and obligations
>
> If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
> public under the GFDL (with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or
> back-cover texts). In order to contribute, you therefore must be in a
> position to grant this license, which means that either
>
> * you own the copyright to the material, for instance because you
> produced it yourself, or
> * you acquired the material from a source that allows the licensing
> under GFDL, for instance because the material is in the public
> domain <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain> or is itself
> published under GFDL.
>
> In the first case, you retain copyright to your materials. You can later
> republish and relicense them in any way you like. However, you can never
> retract the GFDL license for the versions you placed here: that material
> will remain under GFDL forever.
>
> In the second case, if you incorporate external GFDL materials, as a
> requirement of the GFDL, you need to acknowledge the authorship and
> provide a link back to the network location of the original copy.
> </excerpt>
>
> Jay
>
>
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by "Jay D. McHugh" <ja...@joyfulnoisewebdesign.com>.
lasantha@opensource.lk wrote:
> 1. License issues like above might occur because of the contributors are
> not accepting ASF licenses. Also it will not promote the ASF licenses. I
> think you all will understand the importance of ASF licenses to the open
> source community.
I may be wrong, but I think the issue of license on content added to the
wiki came up before and it was stated that content added to wiki is (by
the nature of wikis) automatically freely available to everyone for any use.
It may be a good idea to put an official license policy onto the wiki
though. That way, there should hopefully not be any future questions
about permissible use to it's content or the license that applies.
Here is an excerpt from the license/copyright page from Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights):
<excerpt>
Contributors' rights and obligations
If you contribute material to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the
public under the GFDL (with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or
back-cover texts). In order to contribute, you therefore must be in a
position to grant this license, which means that either
* you own the copyright to the material, for instance because you
produced it yourself, or
* you acquired the material from a source that allows the licensing
under GFDL, for instance because the material is in the public
domain <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain> or is itself
published under GFDL.
In the first case, you retain copyright to your materials. You can later
republish and relicense them in any way you like. However, you can never
retract the GFDL license for the versions you placed here: that material
will remain under GFDL forever.
In the second case, if you incorporate external GFDL materials, as a
requirement of the GFDL, you need to acknowledge the authorship and
provide a link back to the network location of the original copy.
</excerpt>
Jay
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by la...@opensource.lk.
Hi Hernan,
I felt this is yet another issue created by confluence. That is because
people can contribute to the Geronimo project not accepting ASF licenses.
If the contributors are working with the JIRA then they have to accept ASF
license with each and every patch (if they like to contribute to the
project). Is there any way to give this functionality to the confluence
too? Anyway I am not a fan of confluence than JIRA to get contributions to
an open source project, hear are my points regarding it (may be this
horse has been beaten to dead several times by this same community ;-) ).
First I will start from it's positives. Yeah I accept it will give very
nice presentation to the users with some very good inbuilt capabilities
(pdf export etc etc).
The point I am against here is using it directly to get the user
contributions. Here are some the points come to my mind.
1. License issues like above might occur because of the contributors are
not accepting ASF licenses. Also it will not promote the ASF licenses. I
think you all will understand the importance of ASF licenses to the open
source community.
(This is one of the major promotion slogans of Geronimo too ;-) )
2. Visibility of the work done in the confluence is limited to a very few
developers because most of the developers are working with the JIRA. I am
not sure this is the best way to handle a community driven project like
Geronimo.
3. Nobody is going to create JIRA issues regarding documentation issues.
So according to my understanding documentation will not improve from
starting. There is noway to submit a patches to the existing bugs of the
documentation (then we might have to get the help of JIRA).
4. I am sure people like tech writers, graphic editors, translators etc.
are part of an open source project contributors (I heard some of the
Apache members start their work as tech writers). In this kind of
environment they will not get the credit they deserve too.
Comments !!!!
Thanks,
Lasantha Ranaweera
> Lasantha,
> those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display
> ASF2 license.
>
> This is the text we have in trunk today
>
> <!--
> Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> You may obtain a copy of the License at
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
> implied.
> See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> limitations under the License.
> -->
>
> Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add
> the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are
> updating.
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
>
> Thanks for taking care of this.
>
> Cheers!
> Hernan
>
> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
>> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not.
>> :-\
>>
>> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>>> in following url:
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>>
>>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>>
>>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> /*****************************************************************
>> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
>> *
>> * Date Version Author Changes
>> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
>> *
>> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
>> * All rights reserved.
>> *****************************************************************/
>>
>> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>>
>> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>>
>> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
>> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
>> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>>
>> /**
>> * Business logic stateless bean.
>> *
>> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
>> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless"
>> view-type="remote"
>> */
>> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>>
>> /** Serial version uid. */
>> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>>
>> /**
>> * @ejb.interface-method
>> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
>> *
>> * @return result message
>> */
>> public String upload() {
>> return "File successfully uploaded";
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see
>> javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
>> */
>> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
>> RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * Create method.
>> *
>> * @ejb.create-method
>> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
>> *
>> * @throws EJBException
>> * @throws RemoteException
>> */
>> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
>> */
>> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
>> */
>> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>>
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
>> */
>> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
>> // Nothing...
>> }
>> }
>
Re: important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Hernan Cunico <hc...@gmail.com>.
Lasantha,
those samples were donated to the project ergo they should only display ASF2 license.
This is the text we have in trunk today
<!--
Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
-->
Could you please remove the unnecessary (old) data and comments and add the appropriate lines to each of the files for all the samples you are updating.
http://www.apache.org/licenses may give you some additional tips.
Thanks for taking care of this.
Cheers!
Hernan
Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
> Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
> attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not. :-\
>
> Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
>> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
>> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
>> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
>> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
>> in following url:
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>>
>> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
>> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>>
>> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
>> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lasantha Ranaweera
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /*****************************************************************
> * File: BusinessLogicEJB.java
> *
> * Date Version Author Changes
> * Oct.05,2005 1.1 Ivan Dubrov Created
> *
> * Copyright (c) 2005, IBM Corporation
> * All rights reserved.
> *****************************************************************/
>
> package com.ibm.j2g.security;
>
> import java.rmi.RemoteException;
>
> import javax.ejb.EJBException;
> import javax.ejb.SessionBean;
> import javax.ejb.SessionContext;
>
> /**
> * Business logic stateless bean.
> *
> * @ejb.bean name="BusinessLogic" display-name="BusinessLogic bean"
> * jndi-name="ejb/BusinessLogic" type="Stateless" view-type="remote"
> */
> public class BusinessLogicEJB implements SessionBean {
>
> /** Serial version uid. */
> private static final long serialVersionUID = 4688250533090120601L;
>
> /**
> * @ejb.interface-method
> * @ejb.permission role-name = "uploader"
> *
> * @return result message
> */
> public String upload() {
> return "File successfully uploaded";
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#setSessionContext(javax.ejb.SessionContext)
> */
> public void setSessionContext(SessionContext ctx) throws EJBException,
> RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * Create method.
> *
> * @ejb.create-method
> * @ejb.permission unchecked="true"
> *
> * @throws EJBException
> * @throws RemoteException
> */
> public void ejbCreate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbRemove()
> */
> public void ejbRemove() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbActivate()
> */
> public void ejbActivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
>
> }
>
> /**
> * @see javax.ejb.SessionBean#ejbPassivate()
> */
> public void ejbPassivate() throws EJBException, RemoteException {
> // Nothing...
> }
> }
important: License issues in Geronimo 1.0 Samples
Posted by Lasantha Ranaweera <la...@opensource.lk>.
Sorry to send it again. This is an important issue. Have a look at the
attached file. I have stuck here whether to reuse this sample or not. :-\
Lasantha Ranaweera wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Past few days I have been upgrading JBoss to Apache Geronimo samples
> from v1.0 of the documentation to v1.1. As part of the upgrade
> procedure, when I was looking at one of the samples I found something
> that grabbed my attention in the existing JBoss to Geronimo sample
> applications. Have a look at "JBoss to Geronimo - Security Migration"
> in following url:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDOC10/JBoss+to+Geronimo+-+Security+Migration
>
> Source code of this sample contains some proprietary license. So we
> can't do any editing this sample. Isn't it?
>
> I'm quite new to the open source model, and AFAIK it should come with
> ASF license. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Lasantha Ranaweera
>
>
>