Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Torsten Curdt]

Actually IMHO no. If a component doesn't have people that overlook it,
that means advance in the development, and no feedback from users, which
means that in this non-perfect world it's not used, then it's not a
healthy component. In opensource user testing is vital in keeping the
system working.



...so the FileGenerator is non-healthy or when was the last time we got 
feedback about it? ;) Seriously: I don't think we always get feedback on 
components that are "just working".

Apache code is licensed with the Apache license. Current version is 1.1
Any additional credit in the license is (IANAL) to be decided by the
board of Apache.


ah - ok!


>> I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm
>> concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it 
there's
>> a way in which we can actually have that code tested.
>
>
> Well, I do have the necessary jar to compile it but I cannot really
> test in real life. But I am pretty sure we sooner or later gonna have
> a committer that will have a testing environment... until that we can
> mark it as unstable block and wait for user feedback.


Hmmm... I'd prefer to wait till we actually have this testing in place,

That's also what I prefer! But I think these components might become
a very important point to gain more visibility. How would you like to
announce them to get people taking care of them if we don't have it
in our CVS?! I doubt people will go trough the patch queue when looking
into cocoon.


or someone actually actively cares for it in Cocoon. Michael said he's
working on it, let's wait and see what he proposes. My impression is
that it will address these issues.


well, no need to hurry - but the patch was in the queue for ages...
...would be nice to accept this donation - finally ;)




It's not that I don't want dead code in Cocoon, it's that I want live
code! See it from the positive side :-)


always do :)
--
Torsten


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Nicola Ken Barozzi]

Torsten Curdt wrote:




> If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it.
> Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this
> is no big problem.


If I cannot test it myself, I would be very suspicious of having it in
our repository.

> If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
> ...like maybe others that are rarely used;)


Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not
making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.


not used (which could also be "used - but no given feedback since it 
works") doesn't necessarily mean non-healthy, don't you think?

Actually IMHO no. If a component doesn't have people that overlook it, 
that means advance in the development, and no feedback from users, which 
means that in this non-perfect world it's not used, then it's not a 
healthy component. In opensource user testing is vital in keeping the 
system working.

> So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue.
>
> Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into
> trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't
> even used by many people...
>
> But I think: either the licence is
> a) ok -> let's include it
> b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere
> else


The code has to have a license grant for Apache. We are talking about an
important *donation* in *code*, not a jar we use.


Sorry for not being precise - I was aware of that...
...though I am not quite sure what I actually really means.

Will donated files always have a Apache licence header plus the comment 
of the donation. Or is it also possible to have different licence header?

Apache code is licensed with the Apache license. Current version is 1.1
Any additional credit in the license is (IANAL) to be decided by the 
board of Apache.

I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm
concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it there's
a way in which we can actually have that code tested.


Well, I do have the necessary jar to compile it but I cannot really test 
in real life. But I am pretty sure we sooner or later gonna have a 
committer that will have a testing environment... until that we can mark 
it as unstable block and wait for user feedback.

Hmmm... I'd prefer to wait till we actually have this testing in place, 
or someone actually actively cares for it in Cocoon. Michael said he's 
working on it, let's wait and see what he proposes. My impression is 
that it will address these issues.

It's not that I don't want dead code in Cocoon, it's that I want live 
code! See it from the positive side :-)

--
Nicola Ken Barozzi   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
-


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Torsten Curdt]

I agree. OTOH code can still be reviewed and a decision could be based
on that. And I agree with Torsten here: I would bet that we will
attract users that would care for these components once they are
announced.


yepp!

I don't think working or not working is the problem. I bet Michael is 
using (t)his stuff somehow - so it should work. But we can mark it as 
unstable first.

...as long as we review the code I'd fine!

>>If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
>>...like maybe others that are rarely used;)
>
>Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not
>making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.


Of course it would be an optional component. Michael has already
prepared the patch to go into src/blocks.


sounds excellent!




Do we have SAP R3 users on this list? Please comment!
Shall we ask on cocoon-users?


sure - why not!
--
Torsten


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Torsten Curdt]

> If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it.
> Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this
> is no big problem.


If I cannot test it myself, I would be very suspicious of having it in
our repository.

> If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
> ...like maybe others that are rarely used;)


Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not
making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.


not used (which could also be "used - but no given feedback since it 
works") doesn't necessarily mean non-healthy, don't you think?

> So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue.
>
> Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into
> trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't
> even used by many people...
>
> But I think: either the licence is
> a) ok -> let's include it
> b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere
> else


The code has to have a license grant for Apache. We are talking about an
important *donation* in *code*, not a jar we use.


Sorry for not being precise - I was aware of that...
...though I am not quite sure what I actually really means.

Will donated files always have a Apache licence header plus the comment 
of the donation. Or is it also possible to have different licence header?

I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm
concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it there's
a way in which we can actually have that code tested.


Well, I do have the necessary jar to compile it but I cannot really test 
in real life. But I am pretty sure we sooner or later gonna have a 
committer that will have a testing environment... until that we can mark 
it as unstable block and wait for user feedback.
--
Torsten



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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Christian Haul]

On 18.Dec.2002 -- 02:07 PM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
> Torsten Curdt wrote:
> >Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>
> >>Correct. Though another issue your PMC may want to see answered is - how
> >>is this community going to maintain it; are there enough active SAP
> >>experts to see to it that this piece of code is going to be alive and
> >>healty for years to come. Even if some of the original people drop out ?
> >>
> >>This is a rather specific piece of code wiht a lot of infrastructure
> >>around it.
> >
> >
> >If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it.
> >Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this is 
> >no big problem.
> 
> If I cannot test it myself, I would be very suspicious of having it in 
> our repository.

I agree. OTOH code can still be reviewed and a decision could be based
on that. And I agree with Torsten here: I would bet that we will
attract users that would care for these components once they are
announced.

> >If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
> >...like maybe others that are rarely used;)
> 
> Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not 
> making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.

Of course it would be an optional component. Michael has already
prepared the patch to go into src/blocks.

> >So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue.
> >
> >Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into 
> >trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't even 
> >used by many people...
> >
> >But I think: either the licence is
> >a) ok -> let's include it
> >b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere else
> 
> The code has to have a license grant for Apache. We are talking about an 
> important *donation* in *code*, not a jar we use.

Michael is working on that. AFAIU his company is willing to sign this
grant. Plus he is willing to work on mock objects that would enable
compilation without any SAP jars. Thus this would be not more tied to
SAP as the jsp block to weblogic.

> I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm 
> concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it there's 
> a way in which we can actually have that code tested.

Do we have SAP R3 users on this list? Please comment!
Shall we ask on cocoon-users?

Chris.
-- 
C h r i s t i a n   H a u l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fingerprint: 99B0 1D9D 7919 644A 4837  7D73 FEF9 6856 335A 9E08

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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Nicola Ken Barozzi]

Torsten Curdt wrote:

Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:



On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:


>IANAL, but AFAIK the code has to be formally donated to the ASF, and
>things like the one at the end have to be decided by the ASF.


Correct. Though another issue your PMC may want to see answered is - how
is this community going to maintain it; are there enough active SAP
experts to see to it that this piece of code is going to be alive and
healty for years to come. Even if some of the original people drop out ?

This is a rather specific piece of code wiht a lot of infrastructure
around it.



If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it.
Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this is 
no big problem.

If I cannot test it myself, I would be very suspicious of having it in 
our repository.

If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
...like maybe others that are rarely used;)


Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not 
making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.

So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue.

Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into 
trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't even 
used by many people...

But I think: either the licence is
a) ok -> let's include it
b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere else

The code has to have a license grant for Apache. We are talking about an 
important *donation* in *code*, not a jar we use.

I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm 
concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it there's 
a way in which we can actually have that code tested.

--
Nicola Ken Barozzi   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
-


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Torsten Curdt]

Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:



On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:


>IANAL, but AFAIK the code has to be formally donated to the ASF, and
>things like the one at the end have to be decided by the ASF.


Correct. Though another issue your PMC may want to see answered is - how
is this community going to maintain it; are there enough active SAP
experts to see to it that this piece of code is going to be alive and
healty for years to come. Even if some of the original people drop out ?

This is a rather specific piece of code wiht a lot of infrastructure
around it.


If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it.
Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this is 
no big problem.

If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS.
...like maybe others that are rarely used;)

So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue.

Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into 
trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't even 
used by many people...

But I think: either the licence is
a) ok -> let's include it
b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere else
--
Torsten


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Dirk-Willem van Gulik]

On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> IANAL, but AFAIK the code has to be formally donated to the ASF, and
> things like the one at the end have to be decided by the ASF.

Correct. Though another issue your PMC may want to see answered is - how
is this community going to maintain it; are there enough active SAP
experts to see to it that this piece of code is going to be alive and
healty for years to come. Even if some of the original people drop out ?

This is a rather specific piece of code wiht a lot of infrastructure
around it.

Dw


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Nicola Ken Barozzi]

Christian Haul wrote:

Hi all.

Since the long pending patch of the SAP R3 components is bugging me I
wanted to work on it. I'm a bit lost on the included licence,
though. Could someone more knowledgable please advice on the further
course of action on these components?

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

The licence seems to be OK. What about the part on SAP at the very end?


IANAL, but AFAIK the code has to be formally donated to the ASF, and 
things like the one at the end have to be decided by the ASF.
I attached to this message an example of a license grant that should be 
signed by the donor.

In any case, please keep the PMC notified at all times, and for special 
cases like the bottom part, please query the board. They have a meeting 
today, so if you send a note to them, they could talk about it right away.

If you need further help, I'm here :-)

Thanks for doing this, very much appreciated.

--
Nicola Ken Barozzi   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
-
License Agreement


This License Agreement is entered into as of the ___ day of
, 200__ by _, a resident of
_ ("Licensor") in favor of The Apache Software
Foundation, a Delaware nonstock membership corporation (the
"Foundation").

WHEREAS, Licensor owns or has sufficient rights to contribute the
software source code and other related intellectual property as
itemized on Exhibit A ("Software") under the terms of this agreement
to the Foundation for use within Foundation software development
projects ("Projects").

NOW, THEREFORE, FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt
and legal sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties
hereto, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows:

1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, Licensor
hereby grants to the Foundation:
  a) a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable
 copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of,
 publicly display, publicly perform, distribute and sublicense,
 internally and externally, the Software and such derivative
 works, in source code and object code form; and,
  b) a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable
 patent license under Licensed Patents to make, use, sell,
 offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer the Software
 in source code and object code form. "Licensed Patents" mean
 patent claims owned by Licensor which are necessarily
 infringed by the use or sale of the Software alone.

2. Licensor represents that, to Licensor's knowledge, Licensor is
legally entitled to grant the above license. Licensor agrees to notify
the Foundation of any facts or circumstances of which Licensor becomes
aware and which makes or would make Licensor's representations in this
License Agreement inaccurate in any respect.

3. This Software is provided AS-IS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS
OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION,
ANY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY
OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. NEITHER THE LICENSOR NOR ITS
SUPPLIERS WILL BE LIABLE TO THE FOUNDATION OR ITS LICENSEES FOR ANY
DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION LOST PROFITS), HOWEVER CAUSED
AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,
OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF
THE USE OR DISTRIBUTION OF THE WORK OR THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS
GRANTED HEREUNDER, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

This License Agreement is the entire agreement of the parties
with respect to its subject matter, and may only be amended by a
writing signed by each party. This License Agreement may be
executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be
considered an original.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Licensor has executed this License Agreement
as of the date first written above.

  LICENSOR:

  Signed By: _

  Print Name:  ___




Exhibit A

List of software and other intellectual property covered by this
agreement:


1 Short Description
 
  Javasrc is a program written in Java that creates a set of HTML  
  pages out of your Java source code. 
  The format looks like javadoc and the methods and classes are 
  cross-referenced.


2 filename and MD5 of the code tarball

 filename: _
 
 MD5:  _



3 List of any other documents included with this Exhibit A.


   _


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

Re: SAP Components / Licence

[Ovidiu Predescu]

It looks like the author of the code has to obtain the permission from 
his company to assign the copyright of the code to ASF. Unless that 
happens, the code cannot be incorporated in the core of Cocoon.

Regards,
Ovidiu

On Tuesday, Dec 17, 2002, at 09:13 US/Pacific, Christian Haul wrote:

Hi all.

Since the long pending patch of the SAP R3 components is bugging me I
wanted to work on it. I'm a bit lost on the included licence,
though. Could someone more knowledgable please advice on the further
course of action on these components?

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9075

The licence seems to be OK. What about the part on SAP at the very end?

And this is the licence:
/* 
 * The Web3 Software License, Version 1.0
 *
 * Copyright (c) 2002 EFP Consulting GmbH.  All rights
 * reserved.
 *
 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
 * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
 * are met:
 *
 * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
 *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
 *
 * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
 *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
 *the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
 *distribution.
 *
 * 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution,
 *if any, must include the following acknowledgment:
 *   "This product includes software developed by the
 *EFP Consulting GmbH (http://www.efp.cc/web3)."
 *Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software 
itself,
 *if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear.
 *
 * 4. The names "Web3" and "EFP Consutling GmbH" must
 *not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
 *software without prior written permission. For written
 *permission, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 *
 * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called "Web3",
 *nor may "Web3" appear in their name, without prior written
 *permission of the EFP Consulting GmbH.
 *
 * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED
 * WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
 * OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
 * DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE APACHE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION OR
 * ITS CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
 * SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
 * LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF
 * USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND
 * ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,
 * OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT
 * OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
 * SUCH DAMAGE.
 * 
 *
 * For more information on Web3, please see .
 *
 * Portions of this software are based either upon public domain
 * software originally written at The Apache Software Foundation and
 * upon commercial software at SAP AG. License for those portions of
 * SAP AG is not included and has to be seperately licensed by the
 * licensee.
 * For information on SAP AG, please see , for
 * information on The Apache Software Foundation, please see
 * .
 */

	Chris.
--
C h r i s t i a n   H a u l
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fingerprint: 99B0 1D9D 7919 644A 4837  7D73 FEF9 6856 335A 9E08

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



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