this is exceptionally great news. The question is now how we can move in the code. The old question that arises now is incubator versus code grant.
even a software grant has be to discussed on [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well.
The question that we'll need to answer is how the community that so far has developed the code is structured. Main question: Can and will the code be further developed by mostly persons who are already member of the MyFaces community, or does community building have to occurr? Both Scott and me will be active in the development, we both are active in the Trinidad/MyFaces community, so this is a plus. I would guess that also Stan will be interested. So, I think that we as a community will be able to handle the code easily.
Scott is already ASF committer, like you and Stan. Also others here, not committers (yet), have provided feedback regarding JSF + portlet. Form that side, all is fine :) -Matthias
I would tend to think that in this case, a direct code grant would be ok, what does everyone else think? regards, Martin On 7/25/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dennis, > > I checked with the project lead for JSR-301 and he said licensing for > the TCK is still up in the air. It is his intention to publish it under > the Apache 2.0 license but I believe he is still trying to work out the > logistics with Sun to make sure that Oracle can comply with the JCP. > > He said that until the logistics of the TCK are worked out, he would > like to contribute some testing code to the subproject here at Apache > and would ultimately like those unit tests to drive the TCK. But the > TCK is, in large part, a piece of the JCP which gauges compliance of > various implementations so we need to play nicely with them. > > Scott > > Scott O'Bryan wrote: > > One more comment, the unit tests that will hopefully be made as part > > of the Maven build will be developed as part of this project and I > > have hopes they will be a lot more comprehensive then the tests > > provided by the TCK. :) That's up to the community to help with that > > however. > > > > Scott > > > > Scott O'Bryan wrote: > >> I'll double check, but I think the TCK will be liscenced using the > >> Apache 2.0, it's just that Oracle will maintain the copyrights. As > >> per agreements with the JCP, the TCK can only enforce the > >> specification which is developed by the Java Community EG. I know > >> Martin is on the Expert Group representing Apache and so am I > >> (representing Trinidad and the new Rich Renderkit we'll be donating > >> soon). So the TCK can be influenced though that process. > >> > >> IMO, it's very much the same relationship that MyFaces has with the > >> JSF TCK which is developed by Sun, except that because the code > >> developed by the Apache community will be used as the R.I., the > >> Apache community has a much better chance to influence both the TCK > >> and the future of the standard Portlet Bridge. > >> > >> Scott > >> > >> Dennis Byrne wrote: > >>> believe the TCK will be developed in-house at Oracle, but the > >>> > >>> development of the 301 bridge itself will be done as part of > >>> MyFaces > >>> community. > >>> > >>> > >>> Hello Scott. Does Oracle have control of the TCK licensing? If so, > >>> what are the chances of having anonymous read access to the code, > >>> and a license that lets us keep this in the continuous integration > >>> loop right next the unit tests. Thanks > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Scott > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Dennis Byrne > >> > >> > > > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
-- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
