Paul,
I'm going to ask others more versed in legalities to jump in
regarding your questions...I do have a quick question though: how
does Geronimo handle this as I believe the JCP IP rules are far more
restrictive than those associated with the specs?
Thanks,
Jim
On Jun 7, 2006, at 11:41 AM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
> Simon
>
> I'm have concerns about both these approaches.
>
> Regarding the first proposal, there might be IP or other requirements
> that joining the spec collaboration involves that might not be
> suitable for some Tuscany committers. I'm not clear what is involved
> in joining the spec group but I'm guessing based on your note that
> there are possibly non-disclosure agreements and IP agreements. I'm
> concerned that there might end up two classes of committers - those
> with access to the spec group and those without.
>
> Regarding the second proposal, this seems a little anti-thetical to
> the Apache approach... where generally everything is done in the open.
> I'm also concerned about the implications of committing code to
> Tuscany based on a private mailing list. The ICLA states:
> "You represent that you are legally entitled to grant the above
> license." There are also other related clauses. What I'm concerned is
> that committers might be committing code that is based on things they
> learnt under a non-disclosure agreement.
>
> I'm sure none of these issues is insurmountable, but I think we need
> to have a clear approach before we try and exit incubation. It might
> also be worth consulting the legal team at Apache once we have a
> clearer idea of what the issues are.
>
> Paul
>
> On 6/7/06, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I can think of a couple of options that might work.
>>
>> 1. All Tuscany participants could join the spec collaboration and
>> get first-hand information on issues and agreed changes.
>> 2. Set up a private Apache mailing list on which non-public spec
>> information could be distributed and discussions could take
>> place.
>>
>> I think the second option is better, since it's probably easier for
>> people not working for members of the collaboration to get on a
>> private Apache list than to sign up as collaboration members.
>> This will require agreement from the collaboration team, since it
>> would open up access to this information to people who have not
>> signed the formal collaboration agreement. Maybe there could be a
>> lighter-weight "open source" version of the collaboration agreement
>> designed for this purpose.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> Jim Marino wrote:
>>
>> > Good question...
>> >
>> > In the spec group, one of the major changes we are currently
>> > undertaking is a move to a recursive model where components can
>> either
>> > be leaf-types ("atomic") or composite, in which case they may
>> contain
>> > children. In previous versions of the spec we had a two-level
>> model
>> > (module components and components which were leaf-types). The
>> recursive
>> > model simplifies a great deal since it eliminates a number of
>> > unnecessary concepts. For example, components used to offer
>> services
>> > and have references while module components offered entry
>> points and
>> > had external services. Since there is a common type, component,
>> we can
>> > dispense with the separate concepts of entry point and external
>> service
>> > and just call them "service" (~entry point) and
>> "reference" (~external
>> > service). I think this makes sense from a conceptual standpoint
>> since a
>> > composite component may have a service bound to some protocol/
>> transport
>> > combination such as SOAP/HTTP while a service on a POJO may be
>> thought
>> > of as having a "shared memory"/by- reference binding. Besides
>> making the
>> > implementation more concise, It also makes slideware easier
>> since we
>> > have the same picture at different levels :-)
>> >
>> > In any event, this was one of the topics we were intending to
>> cover on
>> > the call.
>> >
>> > I think this is a good question specifically because I believe the
>> > coordination between the spec collaboration and the Tuscany
>> community
>> > could be a lot better. This partly arises from the fact that
>> the people
>> > such as myself and Jeremy who wear both hats are swamped with
>> work and
>> > things sometimes get delayed. Another reason for the less- than-
>> ideal
>> > situation is that a collaboration model between the spec group and
>> > Tuscany has not been put in place. Regarding the latter, I believe
>> > there are some systemic improvements we can make such as not
>> having to
>> > channel issues through Jeremy or myself as well as having more
>> defined
>> > input mechanisms between the two groups. The spec group is
>> aware of the
>> > issue as well so I think it would be fruitful for us to come up
>> with
>> > some concrete proposals we could discuss with them.
>> >
>> > Ideas?
>> >
>> > Jim
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jun 6, 2006, at 2:18 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
>> >
>> >> By the way can someone explain what the term "Recursive Core
>> >> Architecture" means?
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >> On 6/6/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> It looks as if we have the choice of Thursday or Friday this
>> week, or
>> >>> rescheduling for two weeks. I'd prefer we do it this week.
>> >>>
>> >>> Jim
>> >>>
>> >>> On Jun 6, 2006, at 1:28 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > Next week would be better for me. I'm landing home from the
>> US on
>> >>> > Friday and 8-10PST is 4-6pm on Friday evening which aint
>> popular in
>> >>> > blighty :-)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Paul
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On 6/6/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> >> I'm out all next week so it sounds as if Friday is the
>> best time for
>> >>> >> most people.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Jim
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Jun 6, 2006, at 10:42 AM, Rick wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> > I like to second all of what Ant wrote and also Ken Tam
>> asked
>> >>> if it
>> >>> >> > could not be delayed till next week. I'd like to be up
>> to speed
>> >>> and
>> >>> >> > just a few days more would help to digest it all to be more
>> >>> >> > informed, but I'll go with Friday if that's what it is.
>> >>> >> > ant elder wrote:
>> >>> >> >> I agree 100% with Ken, could you give just a little more
>> >>> >> >> information about
>> >>> >> >> whats going on here? That email just gives hints -
>> there's been
>> >>> >> >> some SCA
>> >>> >> >> spec changes, there's some code in the the sandbox for
>> "recursive
>> >>> >> >> core
>> >>> >> >> architecture work" and "to clearly demarcate the runtime
>> >>> extension
>> >>> >> >> mechanism."
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> What are the spec changes, are there any new spec documents
>> >>> people
>> >>> >> >> can
>> >>> >> >> review?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Is there anything else that has changed from the M1
>> release code
>> >>> >> >> to whats in
>> >>> >> >> the sandbox?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Whats the state of the sandbox code, does it work, are
>> there any
>> >>> >> >> samples,
>> >>> >> >> does bigbank run?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> What is the intention for the future of the sandbox code?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> It sounds like we're being asked to just go look at
>> some code in
>> >>> >> >> the sandbox
>> >>> >> >> and work all this out for ourselves. There's a lot of
>> people
>> >>> >> >> listening who
>> >>> >> >> have no idea whats going on, so some more detailed
>> background
>> >>> >> >> information
>> >>> >> >> would really help.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Friday is bad for me I can't make anything much after
>> 9am PDT,
>> >>> >> >> same for
>> >>> >> >> Mondays after 5:30BST, but i'll fit in with most times any
>> >>> >> other day.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> ...ant
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> On 6/5/06, Kenneth Tam <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> I am very interested in this, but the short notice also
>> >>> >> concerns me.
>> >>> >> >>> Can we push this out to at least the end of the week (say
>> >>> >> >>> Friday?) or
>> >>> >> >>> sometime next week so that more people on the list get a
>> >>> >> chance to
>> >>> >> >>> find out about it and fit it into their schedules?
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Also, Jim & Jeremy -- if you guys have anything in the
>> way of
>> >>> >> >>> explanatory material that you could circulate on the
>> list/wiki
>> >>> >> >>> before
>> >>> >> >>> the presentation, I think that would be very useful..
>> >>> certainly I
>> >>> >> >>> could use a little more context to help with my own
>> browsing.
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> thanks,
>> >>> >> >>> k
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> On 6/5/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> > Jim Marino wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> > > Hi,
>> >>> >> >>> > >
>> >>> >> >>> > > There has been some mention offline of Jeremy and I
>> >>> >> providing an
>> >>> >> >>> > > overview of changes to the SCA specifications and
>> related
>> >>> >> >>> recursive
>> >>> >> >>> > > core architecture work going on in the sandbox,
>> perhaps
>> >>> >> >>> Wednesday. I'm
>> >>> >> >>> > > happy to do this, however, I'm a bit concerned that
>> since
>> >>> >> >>> this has
>> >>> >> >>> not
>> >>> >> >>> > > been brought up on the list interested people may
>> not be
>> >>> >> >>> able to
>> >>> >> >>> attend
>> >>> >> >>> > > on short notice. Also, a time has not been
>> mentioned. I
>> >>> >> propose
>> >>> >> >>> > > 9PST-11PST, using a combination of Web-Ex and toll-
>> free
>> >>> dial-
>> >>> >> >>> in,
>> >>> >> >>> which
>> >>> >> >>> > > will be provided later.
>> >>> >> >>> > >
>> >>> >> >>> > > If interested people cannot make that time, please
>> speak up
>> >>> >> >>> so we can
>> >>> >> >>> > > arrange an alternate (please don't hesitate to do so,
>> >>> even if
>> >>> >> >>> you are
>> >>> >> >>> > > the only one).
>> >>> >> >>> > >
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>> > Jim, I'm afraid I can't make 8 to 10 on Wed - can do
>> before or
>> >>> >> >>> after.
>> >>> >> >>> > --
>> >>> >> >>> > Jeremy
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> >>> -
>> >>> >> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> >>> -
>> >>> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: tuscany-dev-
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Paul Fremantle
>> >>> > VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
>> >>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> >
>> >>> > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> > 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]
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Paul Fremantle
>> >> VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>> >>
>> >> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> 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]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Simon C Nash IBM Distinguished Engineer
>> Hursley Park, Winchester, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul Fremantle
> VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>
> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
