You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@servicemix.apache.org by Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> on 2008/01/28 05:18:56 UTC
JBoss deployer support from codehaus
I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss deployer code
that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am wondering if
anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms module
similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the deployer
is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to each
ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific to 3.1.2.
I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and 3.3, but
while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN was
something worth exploring.
I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling against
GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
Thanks,
Chris
Re: JBoss deployer support from codehaus
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:18 PM, Chris Custine wrote:
> I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss
> deployer code
> that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am
> wondering if
> anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms
> module
> similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the
> deployer
> is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
> exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to
> each
> ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific
> to 3.1.2.
> I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and
> 3.3, but
> while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN
> was
> something worth exploring.
>
> I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling
> against
> GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
> packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
1. I thought jboss was lgpl not gpl, could you verify which license
you are actually talking about?
2. I thought java code that imported gpl classes was gpl
3. After looking at the mysql java driver jars on maven central repo
I have some doubts they are ok with the mysql licensing so I would be
very careful about making any licensing assumptions based on anything
found on maven central repo.
Have you been following the recent discussions on code that uses lgpl
code on legal-discuss@apache.org? I don't think a policy is entirely
clear yet but may be fairly soon.
thanks
david jencks
>
> This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
Re: JBoss deployer support from codehaus
Posted by Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org>.
I sent an email to legal-discuss this morning, so hopefully we can get a
definitive resolution this week.
Chris
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about raising this problem on legal-discuss and see what it gives ?
> Chris, do you want to take a stab at it ?
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Yes sorry, JBoss is LGPL. We do actually import JBoss classes in
> JBIService
> > and JBIDeployer but all LGPL dependencies are marked as provided in the
> > pom.xml. So when we ship binaries, they are free from LGPL code, and
> when a
> > developer builds on their own machine, they are downloading the JBoss
> jars
> > from maven central themselves so at least we aren't shipping any LGPL
> code.
> >
> > Obviously we will want to run this through legal-discuss if we get that
> far,
> > but I wanted to see if anyone was interested in the first place.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 28, 2008 12:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > As David said, I'd be really happy to bring it back in our main svn
> repo
> > > if
> > > possible.
> > > The main problem is the legal aspects.
> > > One thing is that IIRC (but it should be easy to confirm) is that we
> don't
> > > actually
> > > have any dependenies on JBoss code, because the SAR we build does not
> > > require any API or so (only the SAR descriptor).
> > > In such a case, I think we would be ok to import it.
> > >
> > > And to answer David's question, JBoss is LGPL.
> > >
> > > On Jan 28, 2008 5:18 AM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss
> deployer
> > > > code
> > > > that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am
> wondering
> > > > if
> > > > anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms
> module
> > > > similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the
> > > > deployer
> > > > is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies
> (specifically
> > > > exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to
> each
> > > > ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific
> to
> > > > 3.1.2.
> > > > I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and
> 3.3,
> > > but
> > > > while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN
> was
> > > > something worth exploring.
> > > >
> > > > I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling
> > > against
> > > > GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping
> or
> > > > packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with
> licensing.
> > > >
> > > > This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > ------------------------
> > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
Re: JBoss deployer support from codehaus
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
What about raising this problem on legal-discuss and see what it gives ?
Chris, do you want to take a stab at it ?
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yes sorry, JBoss is LGPL. We do actually import JBoss classes in JBIService
> and JBIDeployer but all LGPL dependencies are marked as provided in the
> pom.xml. So when we ship binaries, they are free from LGPL code, and when a
> developer builds on their own machine, they are downloading the JBoss jars
> from maven central themselves so at least we aren't shipping any LGPL code.
>
> Obviously we will want to run this through legal-discuss if we get that far,
> but I wanted to see if anyone was interested in the first place.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2008 12:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > As David said, I'd be really happy to bring it back in our main svn repo
> > if
> > possible.
> > The main problem is the legal aspects.
> > One thing is that IIRC (but it should be easy to confirm) is that we don't
> > actually
> > have any dependenies on JBoss code, because the SAR we build does not
> > require any API or so (only the SAR descriptor).
> > In such a case, I think we would be ok to import it.
> >
> > And to answer David's question, JBoss is LGPL.
> >
> > On Jan 28, 2008 5:18 AM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss deployer
> > > code
> > > that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am wondering
> > > if
> > > anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms module
> > > similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the
> > > deployer
> > > is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
> > > exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to each
> > > ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific to
> > > 3.1.2.
> > > I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and 3.3,
> > but
> > > while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN was
> > > something worth exploring.
> > >
> > > I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling
> > against
> > > GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
> > > packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
> > >
> > > This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chris
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Guillaume Nodet
> > ------------------------
> > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: JBoss deployer support from codehaus
Posted by Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org>.
Yes sorry, JBoss is LGPL. We do actually import JBoss classes in JBIService
and JBIDeployer but all LGPL dependencies are marked as provided in the
pom.xml. So when we ship binaries, they are free from LGPL code, and when a
developer builds on their own machine, they are downloading the JBoss jars
from maven central themselves so at least we aren't shipping any LGPL code.
Obviously we will want to run this through legal-discuss if we get that far,
but I wanted to see if anyone was interested in the first place.
Chris
On Jan 28, 2008 12:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As David said, I'd be really happy to bring it back in our main svn repo
> if
> possible.
> The main problem is the legal aspects.
> One thing is that IIRC (but it should be easy to confirm) is that we don't
> actually
> have any dependenies on JBoss code, because the SAR we build does not
> require any API or so (only the SAR descriptor).
> In such a case, I think we would be ok to import it.
>
> And to answer David's question, JBoss is LGPL.
>
> On Jan 28, 2008 5:18 AM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss deployer
> > code
> > that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am wondering
> > if
> > anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms module
> > similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the
> > deployer
> > is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
> > exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to each
> > ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific to
> > 3.1.2.
> > I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and 3.3,
> but
> > while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN was
> > something worth exploring.
> >
> > I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling
> against
> > GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
> > packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
> >
> > This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>
Re: JBoss deployer support from codehaus
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
As David said, I'd be really happy to bring it back in our main svn repo if
possible.
The main problem is the legal aspects.
One thing is that IIRC (but it should be easy to confirm) is that we don't
actually
have any dependenies on JBoss code, because the SAR we build does not
require any API or so (only the SAR descriptor).
In such a case, I think we would be ok to import it.
And to answer David's question, JBoss is LGPL.
On Jan 28, 2008 5:18 AM, Chris Custine <cc...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss deployer
> code
> that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am wondering
> if
> anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms module
> similar to the geronimo plugins. One of the main reasons that the
> deployer
> is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
> exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to each
> ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific to
> 3.1.2.
> I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and 3.3, but
> while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN was
> something worth exploring.
>
> I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling against
> GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
> packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
>
> This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/