OK, please forgive me if I missed some important stuff from the beginning of the thread.
My point was simply that Sun should not force us to use a "lesser" name. Unless I've missed it, I don't see that the license actually says anything like that anyway. From what I understand, and this is the way it was for J2EE, we are not allowed to call ourselves a JSF implementation until we pass TCK. That seems to be the meaning of paragraph 2 of the license. BTW, I'm not an attorney and I don't play one on the net.
Of course I'm sure everyone wants us to pass TCK, Sun included. This is why I think we should contact someone with authority on this to make sure Sun won't get bent out of shape if we just call it MyFaces 1.0.9. Have we done that?
Calling it beta or release candidate or whatever hurts the project as it implies that MyFaces is not ready for prime time.
This just seems like common sense to me.
Stan Silvert
JBoss, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thu 4/14/2005 6:18 PM
To: Stan Silvert
Cc: MyFaces Development; Sean Schofield
Subject: Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur?
On 4/14/05, Stan Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <rant>
> It seems to me that all this will be very confusing for users whether we
> call this "Beta" or "non-final". We might as well call it "horse poop",
> because nobody will want to use it in a real app.
>
> It IS MyFaces 1.0.9. It should only be called "Beta" if it is not ready
> for prime time.
>
> I know that before the JBoss Application Server passed the TCK we didn't
> go around calling our product "Beta".
> </rant>
And that was the subject of considerable discussions :-).
>
> Can we get a clarification from Sun as to what the requirements are?
> I'm sure they will be reasonable about it.
See the spec license at the front of the JSF specification, available at:
http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=127
In particular, the second paragraph under "NOTICE: LIMITED LICENSE GRANTS".
Everyone has always wanted MyFaces to pass the TCK and be certified --
it's just time to get with the program.
>
> Stan Silvert
> JBoss, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> callto://stansilvert
Craig McClanahan
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
(Was co-spec-lead for JSF 1.0)
Title: RE: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur?
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotau... Martin Cooper
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Min... Craig McClanahan
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on... Sean Schofield
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' gro... Craig McClanahan
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite'... Sean Schofield
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite'... Manfred Geiler
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite'... Sean Schofield
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite'... Craig McClanahan
- RE: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Stan Silvert
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Craig McClanahan
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Stan Silvert
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Craig McClanahan
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotau... Sean Schofield
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Min... Manfred Geiler
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on... Sean Schofield
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Min... Craig McClanahan
- RE: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Stan Silvert
- RE: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Abrams, Howard A
- Re: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Craig McClanahan
- RE: Who belongs to the 'apsite' group on Minotaur? Stan Silvert
