Jini Surrogate. Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lookup Discovery and Join Kit; Sub Project

[Greg Trasuk <tr...@stratuscom.com>]

On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 21:26, Benson Margulies wrote:

> >
> > I've abandoned any ideas of continuing the Jini Surrogate Architecture
> > implementation, since I haven't been able to satisfy the code provenance
> > rules, despite the code being released under the Apache License 2.0 and
> > covered by a Patent Non-Assertion Covenant.
> 
> I'm completely not up to speed on this, but if legal gave you a frown,
> I guess that's that.
> 
> >

For what it's worth, I've begun a clean-room implementation of Surrogate
starting from the spec, although I make no promises as to how quickly it
will proceed.  I'm curious - should I start committing with the
in-progress code or wait til there's something approaching a working
module?  Personally I'd prefer committing as we go, since (a) I'm much
happier with code in version control and (b) people might be able to
give opinions and assistance.

Then, if the word is commit now, where in the tree should I put it?

Cheers,

Greg.

-- 
Greg Trasuk, President
StratusCom Manufacturing Systems Inc. - We use information technology to
solve business problems on your plant floor.
http://stratuscom.com

Re: Jini Surrogate. Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lookup Discovery and Join Kit; Sub Project

[Peter Firmstone <ji...@zeus.net.au>]

Hi Greg,

That's excellent news! Put it in skunk/surrogate.

Cheers,

Peter.

Greg Trasuk wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 21:26, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>   
>>> I've abandoned any ideas of continuing the Jini Surrogate Architecture
>>> implementation, since I haven't been able to satisfy the code provenance
>>> rules, despite the code being released under the Apache License 2.0 and
>>> covered by a Patent Non-Assertion Covenant.
>>>       
>> I'm completely not up to speed on this, but if legal gave you a frown,
>> I guess that's that.
>>
>>     
>
> For what it's worth, I've begun a clean-room implementation of Surrogate
> starting from the spec, although I make no promises as to how quickly it
> will proceed.  I'm curious - should I start committing with the
> in-progress code or wait til there's something approaching a working
> module?  Personally I'd prefer committing as we go, since (a) I'm much
> happier with code in version control and (b) people might be able to
> give opinions and assistance.
>
> Then, if the word is commit now, where in the tree should I put it?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg.
>
>   

Re: Jini Surrogate. Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lookup Discovery and Join Kit; Sub Project

[Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>]

On 10/16/2010 4:19 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> Greg Trasuk wrote:
...
>> For what it's worth, I've begun a clean-room implementation of Surrogate
>> starting from the spec, although I make no promises as to how quickly it
>> will proceed. I'm curious - should I start committing with the
>> in-progress code or wait til there's something approaching a working
>> module? Personally I'd prefer committing as we go, since (a) I'm much
>> happier with code in version control and (b) people might be able to
>> give opinions and assistance.
>
> I'd like to help, and I think I'm qualified in terms of having never
> looked at any code implementing the Jini Surrogate Architecture.

There is one possible issue. From 1996 until 2002 I worked for Sun 
Microsystems. Prior to that, I worked for Cray Research on developments 
using Sun processors, Solaris etc., with strong collaboration with Sun. 
I signed Sun confidentiality agreements in both capacities.

I have never held any Java-related confidential information except for 
advance briefings on development directions whose contents are now 
totally out of date.

Presumably, Apache has precedents for former Sun employees. Any pointers 
to web pages etc.?

Patricia

Re: Jini Surrogate. Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lookup Discovery and Join Kit; Sub Project

[Patricia Shanahan <pa...@acm.org>]

Greg Trasuk wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 21:26, Benson Margulies wrote:
> 
>>> I've abandoned any ideas of continuing the Jini Surrogate Architecture
>>> implementation, since I haven't been able to satisfy the code provenance
>>> rules, despite the code being released under the Apache License 2.0 and
>>> covered by a Patent Non-Assertion Covenant.
>> I'm completely not up to speed on this, but if legal gave you a frown,
>> I guess that's that.
>>
> 
> For what it's worth, I've begun a clean-room implementation of Surrogate
> starting from the spec, although I make no promises as to how quickly it
> will proceed.  I'm curious - should I start committing with the
> in-progress code or wait til there's something approaching a working
> module?  Personally I'd prefer committing as we go, since (a) I'm much
> happier with code in version control and (b) people might be able to
> give opinions and assistance.

I'd like to help, and I think I'm qualified in terms of having never 
looked at any code implementing the Jini Surrogate Architecture.

Patricia