Fwd: Resolution of the copyright question

[Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>]

looks like the board did not wait for the ApacheCon...Here's the
resolution and advice.

-- dims


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rodent of Unusual Size <ke...@golux.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:03:34 -0500
Subject: Reolution of the copyright question
To: general@incubator.apache.org, derby-dev@db.apache.org


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Based upon advice for our counsel, the ASF has today adopted
a policy governing how copyright notices on contributed files
should be handled.

Here's what happens: The following notice gets added to the
top of each source file:

   Copyright [yyyy] The Apache Software Foundation or its licensors, as
   applicable.

   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.

The contributor may

a) remove any copyright notice it may currently have in the file(s); OR
b) move it to a package-wide COPYRIGHT file, changing 'Copyright [yyyy]'
   to 'Portions Copyright [yyyy]'; OR
c) provide permission in writing to the ASF to do one or the other of the
   above.

If the contributor doesn't have a copyright notice in the files, that's
fine; nothing needs be done beyond the adding of the section above.
- --
#ken    P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"Millennium hand and shrimp!"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQYp9BJrNPMCpn3XdAQFKAAP/fSc0cyW5HooCNZQtlj0MLPnAGRSYTr0o
6YCB8LNRLhQw32qW1OgZ/mLFuD794UTxxblaHOFu8S4fqc9Zr5p0W68uvQqCVTWo
4AXG5uAWams1A1jupd1xoiF0aGlZrBsGijoc2VUuN+15kdLamZiOLl4XgZn7MJxX
9CMsfgGYpgc=
=rtyY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org



-- 
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/

keyedReferenceGroup from UDDI v3

[Steve Viens <st...@viens.net>]

There's always interest in adding features.  If you've done the work to
add support for keyedReferenceGroup to jUDDI then consider contributing
your changes back to the project.  

To contribute, add a feature request via JIRA and include a patch.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Lai Duc Nhuan [mailto:nhuanld@elarion.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 5:24 AM
To: juddi-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: Resolution of the copyright question

Hello,

I come across a point where the UDDI specification V2 does not help. It
turns out that V3 keyedReferenceGroup is a good improvement because I
can
group some categorization criteria, particularly useful in semantic web
services. So it is a real need for V3 support in juddi. :-)
Currently I make changes myself to support keyedReferenceGroup in juddi.
I
don't know if you face any need for V3 or not?

Re: Resolution of the copyright question

[Lai Duc Nhuan <nh...@elarion.com>]

Hello,

I come across a point where the UDDI specification V2 does not help. It
turns out that V3 keyedReferenceGroup is a good improvement because I can
group some categorization criteria, particularly useful in semantic web
services. So it is a real need for V3 support in juddi. :-)
Currently I make changes myself to support keyedReferenceGroup in juddi. I
don't know if you face any need for V3 or not?