You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jcp-open@apache.org by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> on 2007/07/10 19:33:47 UTC
[DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't do
once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we have
received.
I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
that prohibits redistribution.
a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments as
being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This is
considered redistributable.
2. One cannot openly talk about TCK status other than a binary we're
certified or we're not certified. No statements like we've passed
93% of the EJB 3.0 tests.
3. One cannot disclose the contents of the TCK which includes the
names of test cases or code from test cases. In some instances if a
problem needs to be discussed on the dev list a new test case is
created so the problem can be discussed in that context.
4. One cannot disclose information about the organization or
internals of the TCK as provided by the licensee.
5. One cannot talk to other folks (outside of Apache) that are
licensed for the same TCK about the results, contents or share
experiences as that would violate the NDA.
Does anyone else have any folklore tied to TCKs that they would like
to get answers to? Add them on this thread.
It would be really useful if Geir and others familiar with our
agreements can clear up any misconceptions about TCKs. I am looking
to take the contents of this discussion and add this to the JCP page
or other relevant web page so we can have a common point of reference
for the actual requirements and not stories passed from father to son :)
Thanks
Matt
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
FWIW, i was definitely puzzled when i got to know about #7 quite recently.
thanks,
dims
On 7/10/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> 6. When a compliance bug is found via the TCK, a community can be
> notified using spec references without any further interpretations
> that may be in the TCK documentation or comments. It is possible to
> find the spec references using a lookup table but the text is rarely
> as clear as the code, which leads to the "changed for tck" comments
> that people hate. This is very problematic when integrating
> libraries form external communities as discussions typically need to
> enter the NDA arena.
>
> 7. We only share the test harness code with other organizations that
> have a TCK license and want to verify our work. Since there tends to
> be years or work in the harness code, a third party needs the harness
> code to verify compliance of derivative works (e.g., WasCE).
>
> -dain
>
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> > I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> > have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
> > do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> > coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> > rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> > operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
> > have received.
> >
> > I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> > operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
> > we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
> > go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> > committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
> >
> > 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
> > statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
> > that prohibits redistribution.
> > a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
> > as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
> > copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
> > b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
> > annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
> > is considered redistributable.
> >
> > 2. One cannot openly talk about TCK status other than a binary
> > we're certified or we're not certified. No statements like we've
> > passed 93% of the EJB 3.0 tests.
> >
> > 3. One cannot disclose the contents of the TCK which includes the
> > names of test cases or code from test cases. In some instances if
> > a problem needs to be discussed on the dev list a new test case is
> > created so the problem can be discussed in that context.
> >
> > 4. One cannot disclose information about the organization or
> > internals of the TCK as provided by the licensee.
> >
> > 5. One cannot talk to other folks (outside of Apache) that are
> > licensed for the same TCK about the results, contents or share
> > experiences as that would violate the NDA.
> >
> > Does anyone else have any folklore tied to TCKs that they would
> > like to get answers to? Add them on this thread.
> >
> > It would be really useful if Geir and others familiar with our
> > agreements can clear up any misconceptions about TCKs. I am
> > looking to take the contents of this discussion and add this to the
> > JCP page or other relevant web page so we can have a common point
> > of reference for the actual requirements and not stories passed
> > from father to son :)
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Matt
>
>
--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
6. When a compliance bug is found via the TCK, a community can be
notified using spec references without any further interpretations
that may be in the TCK documentation or comments. It is possible to
find the spec references using a lookup table but the text is rarely
as clear as the code, which leads to the "changed for tck" comments
that people hate. This is very problematic when integrating
libraries form external communities as discussions typically need to
enter the NDA arena.
7. We only share the test harness code with other organizations that
have a TCK license and want to verify our work. Since there tends to
be years or work in the harness code, a third party needs the harness
code to verify compliance of derivative works (e.g., WasCE).
-dain
On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
> do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
> have received.
>
> I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
> we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
> go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
>
> 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
> statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
> that prohibits redistribution.
> a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
> as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
> copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
> b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
> annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
> is considered redistributable.
>
> 2. One cannot openly talk about TCK status other than a binary
> we're certified or we're not certified. No statements like we've
> passed 93% of the EJB 3.0 tests.
>
> 3. One cannot disclose the contents of the TCK which includes the
> names of test cases or code from test cases. In some instances if
> a problem needs to be discussed on the dev list a new test case is
> created so the problem can be discussed in that context.
>
> 4. One cannot disclose information about the organization or
> internals of the TCK as provided by the licensee.
>
> 5. One cannot talk to other folks (outside of Apache) that are
> licensed for the same TCK about the results, contents or share
> experiences as that would violate the NDA.
>
> Does anyone else have any folklore tied to TCKs that they would
> like to get answers to? Add them on this thread.
>
> It would be really useful if Geir and others familiar with our
> agreements can clear up any misconceptions about TCKs. I am
> looking to take the contents of this discussion and add this to the
> JCP page or other relevant web page so we can have a common point
> of reference for the actual requirements and not stories passed
> from father to son :)
>
> Thanks
>
> Matt
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>>
>> 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
>> statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
>> that prohibits redistribution.
>> a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
>> as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
>> copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
>> b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
>> annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
>> is considered redistributable.
>
> This sounds icky. The IP is in the text, and you are not creating
> your own IP by typing from printed matter. This is different from
> creating a clean room implementation. By definition, you cannot
> create a clean room implementation of a specification interface.
>
> I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all
> of the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant
> implementation (for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please
> check and see if we have missed any. The CDDL provides for
> redistribution.
>
> The rest of this page should be clarified by someone who has
> primary information.
Craig ... having these redistributable would be awesome. I think its
in EVERYONE's best interest at the JCP and implementors to allow
these artifacts to be released and redistributed. Albeit, no one
should be allowed to modify them as they would be deviating from the
specification. IANAL so I don't know how to handle this but I know
that "typing" them in is error prone, tedious and just plain silly.
Thanks for your work on this.
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or,
What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Tim,
http://java.sun.com/dtd/properties.dtd
http://java.sun.com/dtd/preferences.dtd
are in progress. They're from the Java SE folks.
Thanks,
Craig
On Jul 10, 2007, at 2:09 PM, Tim Ellison wrote:
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all of
>> the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant implementation
>> (for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please check and see
>> if we
>> have missed any. The CDDL provides for redistribution.
>
> There are a couple of dtd's referenced by Harmony code that I
> mentioned
> a while ago on legal-discuss@
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/
> 200706.mbox/%3c467ADBB8.8020005@apache.org%3e
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with
a TCK?
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
> I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all of
> the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant implementation
> (for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please check and see if we
> have missed any. The CDDL provides for redistribution.
There are a couple of dtd's referenced by Harmony code that I mentioned
a while ago on legal-discuss@
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200706.mbox/%3c467ADBB8.8020005@apache.org%3e
Regards,
Tim
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 7/11/07, David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Thanks for putting this together.
> >
> > On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >
> >> I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> >> have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
> >> do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> >> coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> >> rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> >> operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
> >> have received.
> >>
> >> I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> >> operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and
> >> if we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of
> >> it go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> >> committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
> >>
> >> 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
> >> statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
> >> that prohibits redistribution.
> >> a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
> >> as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
> >> copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
> >> b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
> >> annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
> >> is considered redistributable.
> >
> > This sounds icky. The IP is in the text, and you are not creating
> > your own IP by typing from printed matter. This is different from
> > creating a clean room implementation. By definition, you cannot
> > create a clean room implementation of a specification interface.
>
> I haven't completely understood the arguments I've heard about how
> apache can write spec interface jars (such as the ones geronimo has
> written), but doesn't this argument also imply that we can't write
> the source code for and compile and distribute any such interface
> jars under an apache license?
IANAL (hopefully those who know more will jump in)
AIUI there is a certain amount of debate about whether (or not) it is
possible to create clean room implementations of specified interfaces. IIRC
apache leans towards the opinion that it is whereas sun leans towards the
opinion that it is not but it is clear that this matter will require a test
case to be decided conclusively.
whilst these interfaces were not made available under suitable licenses, we
had no option but to create clean room implementations and go with our
opinion
If not, what's the difference? If so,
> where have the sun lawyers been for the last n years?
>
IMHO this is not a good test. there may be very good reasons why sun may not
have felt it in their best interests to use apache as a test case in court.
for example, until the interfaces required to implement specifications
defined by the JCP are available under reasonably liberal licenses, taking
implementors to court over clean room implementations would be foolish. it
is also possible that clarifying these matters would take a long and costly
legal battle. it is wise to pick these battles carefully.
IMHO now that sun is making the interfaces available under a reasonable
license, apache should take the less risky (and more ethical) option of
using these interfaces
- robert
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for putting this together.
>
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>> I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
>> have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
>> do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
>> coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
>> rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
>> operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
>> have received.
>>
>> I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
>> operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and
>> if we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of
>> it go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
>> committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
>>
>> 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
>> statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
>> that prohibits redistribution.
>> a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
>> as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
>> copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
>> b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
>> annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
>> is considered redistributable.
>
> This sounds icky. The IP is in the text, and you are not creating
> your own IP by typing from printed matter. This is different from
> creating a clean room implementation. By definition, you cannot
> create a clean room implementation of a specification interface.
I haven't completely understood the arguments I've heard about how
apache can write spec interface jars (such as the ones geronimo has
written), but doesn't this argument also imply that we can't write
the source code for and compile and distribute any such interface
jars under an apache license? If not, what's the difference? If so,
where have the sun lawyers been for the last n years?
thanks
david jencks
>
> I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all
> of the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant
> implementation (for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please
> check and see if we have missed any. The CDDL provides for
> redistribution.
>
> The rest of this page should be clarified by someone who has
> primary information.
>
> Craig
>>
>> 2. One cannot openly talk about TCK status other than a binary
>> we're certified or we're not certified. No statements like we've
>> passed 93% of the EJB 3.0 tests.
>>
>> 3. One cannot disclose the contents of the TCK which includes the
>> names of test cases or code from test cases. In some instances if
>> a problem needs to be discussed on the dev list a new test case is
>> created so the problem can be discussed in that context.
>>
>> 4. One cannot disclose information about the organization or
>> internals of the TCK as provided by the licensee.
>>
>> 5. One cannot talk to other folks (outside of Apache) that are
>> licensed for the same TCK about the results, contents or share
>> experiences as that would violate the NDA.
>>
>> Does anyone else have any folklore tied to TCKs that they would
>> like to get answers to? Add them on this thread.
>>
>> It would be really useful if Geir and others familiar with our
>> agreements can clear up any misconceptions about TCKs. I am
>> looking to take the contents of this discussion and add this to
>> the JCP page or other relevant web page so we can have a common
>> point of reference for the actual requirements and not stories
>> passed from father to son :)
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Matt
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
On 7/10/07, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> My understanding of xsd and dtd files is that they are in fact a
> "binary form". They are not compiled and are used without modifications.
Having edited both xsd and dtd files in VI, I don't buy that.
> As the policy is not final, perhaps we can update it:
I do buy that. Not by redefining binary, mind you, but executing on
the item listed in the "Reevaluation Checkpoint" section:
* prohibition of the application of Category B
licenses (for binary only) to JavaScript, XML,
and other works lacking a binary form
In particular (as has been pointed out to me offline), how anybody
could object to a requirement to provide source to any change to an
artifact that can only be processed in source form is beyond me.
- Sam Ruby
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or,
What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Sam,
My understanding of xsd and dtd files is that they are in fact a
"binary form". They are not compiled and are used without modifications.
As the policy is not final, perhaps we can update it:
binary
a form of the work not typically used for making modifications,
including executables, object code,
+ dtd files, xsd files, // my own addition to this section
and Java class files
Craig
On Jul 10, 2007, at 11:09 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> The ASF Third-Party Licensing Policy (which seems to be stalled at
> draft 0.52?) only permits redistributing CDDL in 'binary form':
>
> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
> http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
>
> Short version: people come to the ASF expecting to find software
> without reciprocal licensing agreements.
>
> - Sam Ruby
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
On 7/10/07, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for putting this together.
>
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> > I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> > have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
> > do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> > coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> > rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> > operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
> > have received.
> >
> > I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> > operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
> > we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
> > go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> > committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
> >
> > 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
> > statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
> > that prohibits redistribution.
> > a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
> > as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
> > copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
> > b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
> > annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
> > is considered redistributable.
>
> This sounds icky. The IP is in the text, and you are not creating
> your own IP by typing from printed matter. This is different from
> creating a clean room implementation. By definition, you cannot
> create a clean room implementation of a specification interface.
>
> I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all of
> the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant implementation
> (for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please check and see if
> we have missed any. The CDDL provides for redistribution.
The ASF Third-Party Licensing Policy (which seems to be stalled at
draft 0.52?) only permits redistributing CDDL in 'binary form':
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
Short version: people come to the ASF expecting to find software
without reciprocal licensing agreements.
- Sam Ruby
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or,
What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Matt,
Thanks for putting this together.
On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't
> do once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we
> have received.
>
> I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
> we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
> go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
>
> 1. No XSDs provided by Sun can be reshipped because the copyright
> statement in them (as provided from the Sun Website) has a clause
> that prohibits redistribution.
> a. We believe this only applies to the annotations / comments
> as being copyrightable. The other programtic elements are not
> copyrightable as they are part of the programming specification.
> b. As such, we type the XSDs in manually and omit the
> annotations and comments and then insert an Apache License. This
> is considered redistributable.
This sounds icky. The IP is in the text, and you are not creating
your own IP by typing from printed matter. This is different from
creating a clean room implementation. By definition, you cannot
create a clean room implementation of a specification interface.
I've been working with Sun to get them to republish under CDDL all of
the xsd and dtd files that are needed for a compliant implementation
(for all of the JSRs). I think it's done now. Please check and see if
we have missed any. The CDDL provides for redistribution.
The rest of this page should be clarified by someone who has primary
information.
Craig
>
> 2. One cannot openly talk about TCK status other than a binary
> we're certified or we're not certified. No statements like we've
> passed 93% of the EJB 3.0 tests.
>
> 3. One cannot disclose the contents of the TCK which includes the
> names of test cases or code from test cases. In some instances if
> a problem needs to be discussed on the dev list a new test case is
> created so the problem can be discussed in that context.
>
> 4. One cannot disclose information about the organization or
> internals of the TCK as provided by the licensee.
>
> 5. One cannot talk to other folks (outside of Apache) that are
> licensed for the same TCK about the results, contents or share
> experiences as that would violate the NDA.
>
> Does anyone else have any folklore tied to TCKs that they would
> like to get answers to? Add them on this thread.
>
> It would be really useful if Geir and others familiar with our
> agreements can clear up any misconceptions about TCKs. I am
> looking to take the contents of this discussion and add this to the
> JCP page or other relevant web page so we can have a common point
> of reference for the actual requirements and not stories passed
> from father to son :)
>
> Thanks
>
> Matt
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [DISCUSS] Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - or, What can I do with a TCK?
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
On 7/10/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> I've been working on Apache Geronimo for a couple of years now and
> have heard several different stories on what one can do and can't do
> once an NDA has been signed. My objective on this thread is to
> coalesce our communal intelligence on this matter and document the
> rules of engagement so the projects at the ASF, where necessary,
> operate on the same guidelines with the confidential material we have
> received.
>
> I have not seen any formal rules of engagement so here is how we
> operate in Geronimo. Our means of operation may be paranoid and if
> we are doing too much then I'd like to be3 able to let some of it
> go. Here is a set of rules we use (passed on from committer to
> committer so these may not all be actual requirements):
Nice work Matt.
One I'd like to add is:
* One has to request each TCK individually and receives the TCK for
personal use and not project use.
Not well worded I suspect. I mean that I've done an NDA for the JSTL
TCK, I don't get to see the JEE TCK, or the WS ones, or the JSF one
etc etc.
--
I'd really like to see that one gone. Sign an NDA with Apache - sure.
But once you've got the credentials you can pull TCKs rather than
having to ask that they be pushed to you.
Hen