Thanks for the info! ok, so we will read the notes of the board meeting ;)
regards, Martin On 8/12/05, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am hoping to get a Board resolution next week on the topic of > distributing both MPL and CDDL-licensed works. > > Cliff > > On 8/12/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Dan for your information - is there anyone from our fellow ASFers > > well versed in legal stuff willing to comment on that? > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > > > On 8/11/05, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Its an MPL derivitive, and while I don't have the legal knowledge > > > necesssary to address your question, I found an interesting summary of > > > the changes (disclaimer: from sun) > > > > > > * Fixed the "Effect of New Versions" problem. We added an option to > > > make Covered Software available under a specific version of the > > > license, rather than allowing the use of future license versions. > > > This change was made to make the license more reusable by others: > > > it addresses the concern that the license steward could change the > > > terms of the license in ways that are not compatible with a > > > community's (and the Initial Developer's) values and objectives. > > > * Focused the "patent peace" provisions to cover only software > > > released under this license. We felt that this would make the > > > license more acceptable to a diverse community of contributors, > > > whether large or small. We strengthened the the penalties of the > > > remaining provision, however, since we do believe that "patent > > > peace" has an important role to play in open source licenses. > > > * Simplified many of the Required Notices (or in a few cases, > > > removed the requirement) since they seemed overly specific and > > > burdensome. > > > * Clarified the definition of Modifications, to make it easier for > > > readers to understand what is covered by the license and what is not. > > > > > > > > > More info: > > > http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_why_summary.html > > > http://www.sun.com/cddl/CDDL_MPL_redline.pdf > > > http://www.sun.com/cddl/ > > > > > > I am curious as to the ASF's stance on this as well. Nearly everything > > > Sun is licensed under or is going to be under the CDDL now. > > > > > > - Dan > > > > > > Martin Marinschek wrote: > > > > > > > Hi *, > > > > > > > > MyFaces would like to include Facelets support as a rendering > > > > technology... > > > > > > > > Now, Facelets is under the Sun CDDL. > > > > > > > > http://www.sun.com/cddl/ > > > > > > > > Can we include and distribute software under this license with Apache > > > > MyFaces? > > > > > > > > I have looked into the license, and found nothing that would speak > > > > against it, but I am not an expert, and furthermore my English is far > > > > from perfect ;) > > > > > > > > Can anyone clear this up for us? > > > > > > > > Please cc your conclusion - or any parts of the discussion you want > > > > feedback from us or deem interesting to us - with > > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Dan Diephouse > > > Envoi Solutions LLC > > > http://netzooid.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Trainings in English and German
