You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Sam Ruby <ru...@us.ibm.com> on 2001/10/08 21:58:35 UTC
Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
> bloritsch 01/10/08 12:35:16
>
> Added: . LISCENSE.resolver
> Log:
> Comply with license restrictions on resolver.jar
>
> Revision Changes Path
> 1.2 +153 -0 xml-cocoon2/LISCENSE.resolver
I am of the opinion that checking this license in alone does not bring the
ASF into compliance. As this jar is downloadable separately via
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-cocoon2/lib/resolver.jar, we are not
complying with the clause that requires that it be "only distributed
bundled as a part of your Programs".
- Sam Ruby
P.S. License is mispelled in the name of the file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 18:10, Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 02:03:22PM +0200, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> [..]
> > Leo Sutic wrote:
> > > I think the only way to avoid devloving into an IANAL discussion
> > > is to ask Sun. Does any of you have the authority to talk to Sun
> > > on behalf of ASF?
> >
> > I do and I did some days ago: Norman and I are already talking about
> > having Sun donate the resolver.jar code to the ASF. The Apache XML PMC
> > suggested to talk about the integration in a public forum and I was
> > going to start the discussion on the Xerces-J list to know if the
> > community believes it's better to have a separate project for entity
> > resolution or ship it with xerces.
> >
> > Norman like the first solution more (making a different project since it
> > provides more flexibility and componentization even for other
> > parsers/tools), I'm more or less neutral and I'd like to choose the
> > solution that makes it easier for everybody (devs and users) to
> > bootstrap that code.
> [..]
> >
> > So, let's talk about it here to start: assuming the code gets donated,
> > where would you like it to go?
> >
> > The options I see (but maybe you have others) are:
> >
> > 1) integrate with Xerces
> > 2) create another project under Apache XML
>
> I'd prefer a separate project. The catalog code has nothing to do with
> Xerces, and "integrating" it seems to imply breaking parser-neutrality.
Yes, the entity resolver can be set for any parser, so it is outside
any parser project.
> Perhaps there could be an xml-commons, like jakarta-commons, for
> this sort of reusable stuff?
>
> --Jeff
A good idea Jeff. There may well be various XML components
needing a home.
Another option is Avalon Excalibur. That is already up and going,
and that seems to be at the appropriate framework level.
They have already expressed interest (avalon-dev 2001-09).
- David
> > In all cases, next step will be talking to the Xerces community to see
> > what they think about it.
> >
> > Stefano.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Code License
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
John Morrison wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Before we release 2.0 should we clean up (and I'm volunteering - when I get
> back to work on Monday ;) the source code licenses' which are at the top of
> (or should be) every file? I seem to remember something about the short
> form not being acceptable...?
Yes, the members stated (even if not officially) that placing the small
quote on top (and not the license) is not the way to go.
+1 if you want to do it.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Code License
Posted by John Morrison <jo...@ntlworld.com>.
Hi All,
Before we release 2.0 should we clean up (and I'm volunteering - when I get
back to work on Monday ;) the source code licenses' which are at the top of
(or should be) every file? I seem to remember something about the short
form not being acceptable...?
J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@socialchange.net.au>.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 02:03:22PM +0200, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
[..]
> > I think the only way to avoid devloving into an IANAL discussion is to ask
> > Sun. Does any of you have the authority to talk to Sun on behalf of ASF?
>
> I do and I did some days ago: Norman and I are already talking about
> having Sun donate the resolver.jar code to the ASF. The Apache XML PMC
> suggested to talk about the integration in a public forum and I was
> going to start the discussion on the Xerces-J list to know if the
> community believes it's better to have a separate project for entity
> resolution or ship it with xerces.
>
> Norman like the first solution more (making a different project since it
> provides more flexibility and componentization even for other
> parsers/tools), I'm more or less neutral and I'd like to choose the
> solution that makes it easier for everybody (devs and users) to
> bootstrap that code.
[..]
>
> So, let's talk about it here to start: assuming the code gets donated,
> where would you like it to go?
>
> The options I see (but maybe you have others) are:
>
> 1) integrate with Xerces
> 2) create another project under Apache XML
I'd prefer a separate project. The catalog code has nothing to do with
Xerces, and "integrating" it seems to imply breaking parser-neutrality.
Perhaps there could be an xml-commons, like jakarta-commons, for this sort of
reusable stuff?
--Jeff
> In all cases, next step will be talking to the Xerces community to see
> what they think about it.
>
> Stefano.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
For Norm: the discussion was started by:
Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sam Ruby has brought to my attention that including Resolver.jar
> in CVS proposes a potentially serious legal liability. It is
> questionable whether the jar is OK in Cocoon's CVS, but it seems
> that it is definitely not cool in Avalon's CVS (we have an instance
> of the Cocoon in our CVS repository).
> We need to come up with a full solution for the whole resolver
> issue sooner than later. The main thing is that by including
> resolver in CVS, we provide an additional distribution mechanism
> via CVSWeb. That particular page does not have the contents of
> the license, and Apache is not (in my knowledge) an authorized
> redistributor of the package. If Sun officially grants us license,
> the issue is over. If not, we may need to re-implement it so
> that we avoid this potentially sticky issue.
then, Leo Sutic wrote:
> I think the only way to avoid devloving into an IANAL discussion is to ask
> Sun. Does any of you have the authority to talk to Sun on behalf of ASF?
I do and I did some days ago: Norman and I are already talking about
having Sun donate the resolver.jar code to the ASF. The Apache XML PMC
suggested to talk about the integration in a public forum and I was
going to start the discussion on the Xerces-J list to know if the
community believes it's better to have a separate project for entity
resolution or ship it with xerces.
Norman like the first solution more (making a different project since it
provides more flexibility and componentization even for other
parsers/tools), I'm more or less neutral and I'd like to choose the
solution that makes it easier for everybody (devs and users) to
bootstrap that code.
> Arguments for, that I can come up with:
>
> - resolver.jar *is* distributed along with our Programs. The fact that it
> is available separately via CVS is irrelevant, as one can open, for example
> ZIP files directly in IE and thus even if Cocoon was only distributed as a
> .zip file one could get at individual files. I believe the same case can be
> made for CVS.
We should talk to Sun lawyers for that. Maybe Norman can ask his boss
whether they consider this acceptable until the donation deal is done.
> - The alternative is to include a note saying that one should download
> resolver.jar separately from Sun's website. This is, however, against the
> spirit of Sun's licensing. I know that the spirit doesn't matter in court,
> but when talking to Sun...
>
> - "Do you want every Apache project to re-implement it?" I think not.
Exactly. I think both parties agree this would be a very bad thing for
both.
> As I see it, we have nothing to lose on talking to Sun.
right, rather the opposite, it seems :)
> We can not do the
> "let's not alert them and see how much we can get away with". If they say
> that we can't have resolver.jar in our CVS, then we'll have to re-implement
> it - which we would have to do anyway.
I'm sorry that this happened behing your back, folks, but I was just bad
timing from my part not to inform you guys as soon as I was able to talk
publicly about the *possible* deal.
I want to emphasize *possible* because it's not done and nobody (neither
me nor Norman) can guarantee this will ever happen: what we can say is
that both parties (ASF and SUN) agree that would be a good thing to make
the code open source, integrate it better with ASF code and provide good
visibility for both Norman himself and the corporation that paid him to
work on this code.
> Maybe talk to Norman Walsh as well. He is a staff engineer at Sun and while
> he can't assume any responsibility for legal issues regarding licensing,
> maybe he can help make the point.
Norman is a great guy and understands very well the spirit of
collaboration and sharing which we base our communities on.
Unfortunately, he doesn't own the code, but we are so far happy with on
how the process is moving.
So, let's talk about it here to start: assuming the code gets donated,
where would you like it to go?
The options I see (but maybe you have others) are:
1) integrate with Xerces
2) create another project under Apache XML
In all cases, next step will be talking to the Xerces community to see
what they think about it.
Stefano.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
Sam, Berin,
I think the only way to avoid devloving into an IANAL discussion is to ask
Sun. Does any of you have the authority to talk to Sun on behalf of ASF?
Arguments for, that I can come up with:
- resolver.jar *is* distributed along with our Programs. The fact that it
is available separately via CVS is irrelevant, as one can open, for example
ZIP files directly in IE and thus even if Cocoon was only distributed as a
.zip file one could get at individual files. I believe the same case can be
made for CVS.
- The alternative is to include a note saying that one should download
resolver.jar separately from Sun's website. This is, however, against the
spirit of Sun's licensing. I know that the spirit doesn't matter in court,
but when talking to Sun...
- "Do you want every Apache project to re-implement it?" I think not.
As I see it, we have nothing to lose on talking to Sun. We can not do the
"let's not alert them and see how much we can get away with". If they say
that we can't have resolver.jar in our CVS, then we'll have to re-implement
it - which we would have to do anyway.
Maybe talk to Norman Walsh as well. He is a staff engineer at Sun and while
he can't assume any responsibility for legal issues regarding licensing,
maybe he can help make the point.
/LS
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: den 8 oktober 2001 21:59
> To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
>
>
> > bloritsch 01/10/08 12:35:16
> >
> > Added: . LISCENSE.resolver
> > Log:
> > Comply with license restrictions on resolver.jar
> >
> > Revision Changes Path
> > 1.2 +153 -0 xml-cocoon2/LISCENSE.resolver
>
> I am of the opinion that checking this license in alone does not bring the
> ASF into compliance. As this jar is downloadable separately via
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-cocoon2/lib/resolver.jar, we are not
> complying with the clause that requires that it be "only distributed
> bundled as a part of your Programs".
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> P.S. License is mispelled in the name of the file.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org