Although I agree that we had to change the license for the sca.tld file, I'm not sure about the license for the sca-api module contents, searching the dev list archives [1], it looks more like Tuscany were proposing couple of these files to the spec.
Mike, your comments and advice would be very valuable here. [1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/hukfgmzf3pbtbgzb?q=sca+api+jeremy&page=5 On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:34 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Vamsavardhana Reddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Luciano Resende >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I was under the impression that sca.tld [1] was comming from SCA >>>>>> specification. In this case, should it have the Apache License header >>>>>> on it ? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/host-webapp/src/main/resources/META-INF/sca.tld >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Luciano Resende >>>>>> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >>>>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>>>> >>>>> Good point, it comes substantially (there are some Tuscany specific >>>>> parts of if) from the OSOA JEE Integration Specification so it should have >>>>> the attributions and license associated with it as defined in the >>>>> specification. sca.tld is not one of the artifacts available from >>>>> http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0/ so I expect we need to treat it as a >>>>> portion of the spec that has been copied. >>>>> >>>>> The license in the specification [1] doesn't give specific permission >>>>> to construct derviative works of the specification so this gives us a >>>>> problem w.r.t the changes that we need to make. In lieu of immediate >>>>> changes >>>>> to the specification this would be easier if sca.tld were made available >>>>> at >>>>> http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0/. Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> As an aside is the addition of <rtexprval> something we should raise >>>>> with OASIS or is it specific to our implementation? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> http://www.osoa.org/download/attachments/35/SCA_JAVAEE_Integration_V100.pdf?version=1 >>>> >>>> I've raised TUSCANY-2620 to fix this for 1.3.2. I think the derivation >>>> point is not so problematic as this particular part of the spec is marked, >>>> in places, indicating that implementation specific aspects will be present. >>>> I'll go ahead and change the license to the OSOA spec license. Going >>>> forward >>>> we do need to decide what to do about <rtexprval> w.r.t the OASIS >>>> specifications. >>>> >>>> Simon >>> >>> As Raymond pointed out in [2], it appears sca.tld is not compliant with >>> web-jsptaglibrary_2_1.xsd. I will raise an issue with OASIS SCA-J-JEE >>> Subcommittee. >>> >>> ++Vamsi >>> >>> [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01952.html >>> >> >> Thanks Vamsi, that would be a great help. >> >> Simon > > So following on from this I think at least the following files should have > their license headers changed to OSOA. > > In sca\modules\sca-api\src\main\java\org\osoa\sca > > CallableReference.java > ComponentContext.java > Conversation.java > ConversationEndedException.java > NoRegisteredCallbackException.java > RequestContext.java > ServiceReference.java > ServiceRuntimeException.java > ServiceUnavailableException.java > > In sca\modules\sca-api\src\main\java\org\osoa\sca\annotations > > AllowsPassByReference.java > Authentication.java > Callback.java > ComponentName.java > Confidentiality.java > Constructor.java > Context.java > Conversational.java > ConversationAttributes.java > ConversationID.java > Destroy.java > EagerInit.java > EndsConversation.java > Init.java > Integrity.java > Intent.java > OneWay.java > PolicySets.java > Property.java > Qualifier.java > Reference.java > Remotable.java > Requires.java > Scope.java > Service.java > > There are a few definitions.xml files knocking around that have intents from > the specs in. These would also need changing. Anything else that people know > of? > > Regards > > Simon > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
