Re: JCP Open Discussions ... heads up
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-jcp-open/ On 7/6/07, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I guess everyone should look at the threads to make that determination :) -- dims On 7/6/07, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt, > > Actually I do believe a formal policy is being considered...and is under > discussion. > > Jeff > > Matt Hogstrom wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > For those that are not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] there is a > > discussion in progress about the current state of the Open Letter to Sun > > that Apache put out in the public a few months ago. > > > > The discussion is centered around Apache's participation in the Java > > Community Process and specifically around license terms for the > > specifications and TCKs that are used to validate our implementations. > > > > At this point there is no formal policy that is being considered. The > > discussion is about how Apache should respond to the JCP and > > specifically Sun about the their lack of response to the Open Letter. > > Since the outcome of these policies may have a significant impact on > > Geronimo as well as other Apache projects that implement solutions to > > the specifications from the JSR as well as validate them against a TCK I > > advise you to take a peek at the list. > > > > The mailing list is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Cheers. > -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
Re: JCP Open Discussions ... heads up
I guess everyone should look at the threads to make that determination :) -- dims On 7/6/07, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Matt, Actually I do believe a formal policy is being considered...and is under discussion. Jeff Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Hi everyone, > > For those that are not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] there is a > discussion in progress about the current state of the Open Letter to Sun > that Apache put out in the public a few months ago. > > The discussion is centered around Apache's participation in the Java > Community Process and specifically around license terms for the > specifications and TCKs that are used to validate our implementations. > > At this point there is no formal policy that is being considered. The > discussion is about how Apache should respond to the JCP and > specifically Sun about the their lack of response to the Open Letter. > Since the outcome of these policies may have a significant impact on > Geronimo as well as other Apache projects that implement solutions to > the specifications from the JSR as well as validate them against a TCK I > advise you to take a peek at the list. > > The mailing list is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cheers. -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com
Re: JCP Open Discussions ... heads up
Matt, Actually I do believe a formal policy is being considered...and is under discussion. Jeff Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Hi everyone, > > For those that are not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] there is a > discussion in progress about the current state of the Open Letter to Sun > that Apache put out in the public a few months ago. > > The discussion is centered around Apache's participation in the Java > Community Process and specifically around license terms for the > specifications and TCKs that are used to validate our implementations. > > At this point there is no formal policy that is being considered. The > discussion is about how Apache should respond to the JCP and > specifically Sun about the their lack of response to the Open Letter. > Since the outcome of these policies may have a significant impact on > Geronimo as well as other Apache projects that implement solutions to > the specifications from the JSR as well as validate them against a TCK I > advise you to take a peek at the list. > > The mailing list is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cheers.
JCP Open Discussions ... heads up
Hi everyone, For those that are not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] there is a discussion in progress about the current state of the Open Letter to Sun that Apache put out in the public a few months ago. The discussion is centered around Apache's participation in the Java Community Process and specifically around license terms for the specifications and TCKs that are used to validate our implementations. At this point there is no formal policy that is being considered. The discussion is about how Apache should respond to the JCP and specifically Sun about the their lack of response to the Open Letter. Since the outcome of these policies may have a significant impact on Geronimo as well as other Apache projects that implement solutions to the specifications from the JSR as well as validate them against a TCK I advise you to take a peek at the list. The mailing list is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers.
