Simon Laws wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mike Edwards
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Simon Laws wrote:
<snip>
Excellent Luciano. Well found. If they came from Tuscany in the
first place, which this post would seem to suggest, they can
stay with the ASL2 license.
I agree about sca.tld though. Judging by the commit log that was
copied from the spec.
Regards
Simon
Folks,
If those files are derived from material in the OSOA specs, then
they will fall under the license of the OSOA specs.
I dont see how the material can use an ASL2 license.
Yours, Mike.
Mike
Looking back at svn it seems that it was the other way round for the
sca-api files. Part of them came from the original IBM/BEA contribution
and subsequent development went on in sandboxes (presumably in parallel
with the spec development) before they were copied into trunk. I assume
that the people involved in creating these files chose to contribute
them to Tuscany and ASF2 license them and also chose to contribute them
to OSOA for inclusion in the spec. Sound plausible?
Simon
Folks,
The APIs in the SCA Java specifications were developed by a Technical Committee process, involving a
whole group of people from many companies, working under a legal agreement relating to the OSOA
collaboration. The APIs are not the creation of any one person, but are the results of the joint
deliberations of the technical committee. This is true whatever is said in SVN about the origins of
the files currently in Tuscany.
The APIs are created and are licensed for use under the terms of the OSOA collaboration. Any files
which match the specifications are simply copies of the material in the specifications and fall
under the copyright and licensing laid down by the OSOA collaboration. The same principle would
apply to OASIS specifications (they have similar copyright and licensing to OSOA).
I hope this helps to clarify things.
Yours, Mike.
