On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Ian Robinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> My understanding from speaking to Dan Bandera (IBM's member of the OSGi BoD
> ) is that the OSGi Alliance BoD recognize that qualified not-for-profit
> organizations, such as ASF, have a need for OSGi Compliance Tests at
> no-charge, as evidenced by the Alliance's JSR 291 TCK license ( see:
> http://www.osgi.org/JSR291/TCK#nonprofitlicense ). I understand the Alliance
> has work in-progress now that will provide the OSGi Compliance Tests (which
> are undergoing OSGi member approval now) for the newly approved and
> published OSGi Service Platform Release 4 Version 4.2 Specifications under a
> similar license in the near future. If that license turns out to be
> acceptable to the ASF then we should be able to evolve to a position where
> we won't need a special mailing list for discussing finalized OSGi CTs.

I think ASF can accept fairly restrictive TCK usage licenses, as long as;

 * No restrictions are placed on the implementation under test, above
and beyond the Apache License.

 * Downstream users that uses an unmodified version of the Apache
license inherit the 'FULLY COMPLIANT" (unless proven otherwise)
wording in the OSGi agreements.

Please not that there is a difference in language from the Alliance
between "FULLY COMPLIANT" and "CERTIFIED", where the former is
basically "self-certification", such as what has been happening at
Felix. IMHO, such is enough for ASF, and if someone thinks that there
is a market for "OSGi Alliance Certified", may have a business case to
sell such... but is not something ASF should spend money on.


Cheers
-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

Reply via email to