> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew C. Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 26. mars 2003 20:10
> To: Jakarta General List
> Subject: Re: XDoclet, XJavaDoc, Apache and Licensing
>
>
> >
> > No, not implementing any JavaDoc API at all.  I think the main issue
> > is that the API "mirrors" the com.sun.* API in terms of the source
> > code model that it builds.
>
> *http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.1/j2sdk-1_4_1_02-license.html
> "
> 4. Java Technology Restrictions.* You may not modify the Java Platform
> Interface ("JPI", identified as classes contained within the "java"
> package or any subpackages of the "java" package), by creating
> additional classes within the JPI or otherwise causing the addition to
> or modification of the classes in the JPI.  In the event that you create
> an additional class and associated API(s) which (i) extends the
> functionality of the Java platform, and (ii) is exposed to third party
> software developers for the purpose of developing additional software
> which invokes such additional API, you must promptly publish broadly an
> accurate specification for such API for free use by all developers.  You
> may not create, or authorize your licensees to create, additional
> classes, interfaces, or subpackages that are in any way identified as
> "java", "javax", "sun" or similar convention as specified by Sun in any
> naming convention designation.
> "
>
> -Andy
>

Ok, that's a bunch of stuff we're not allowed to do (regarding package
names), and AFAICT we (XJavaDoc) are not doing any of that.

What's your point Andy?

Aslak

>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to