jsr348
  1. jsr348
  2. JSR348-12

1.2.1 - Publish list of accepted TCK licences

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: Process Doc
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Process Doc Section 1.2.1 -

      I'd like to know which licenses are approved already, and why some licenses don't make the cut. This info should be public and not locked behind closed doors. – Jason

        Activity

        Hide
        lightguard added a comment -

        This was my original comment. The public should be able see which licences are the "blessed" licenses. It would also be extremely helpful to know why some licenses didn't pass the bar, in plain English, no legalese.

        Show
        lightguard added a comment - This was my original comment. The public should be able see which licences are the "blessed" licenses. It would also be extremely helpful to know why some licenses didn't pass the bar, in plain English, no legalese.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        This is far too complex to be dealt with in JSR 348 (JCP.next JSR1) but is already on the list for JCP.next JSR2 (see http://java.net/downloads/jsr348/Working%20documents/JSR2-List-May23.html#Licensing)

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - This is far too complex to be dealt with in JSR 348 ( JCP.next JSR1 ) but is already on the list for JCP.next JSR2 (see http://java.net/downloads/jsr348/Working%20documents/JSR2-List-May23.html#Licensing )
        Hide
        lincolnbaxter added a comment -

        These ideas were drafted by an independent group reviewing the Early Draft from June 21, 2011 - apologies for out-of-date issues.

        Show
        lincolnbaxter added a comment - These ideas were drafted by an independent group reviewing the Early Draft from June 21, 2011 - apologies for out-of-date issues.
        Hide
        pcurran added a comment -

        As stated in an earlier comment, this is already on the JSR2 list, so I'm now closing it here.

        Show
        pcurran added a comment - As stated in an earlier comment, this is already on the JSR2 list, so I'm now closing it here.
        Hide
        lightguard added a comment -

        Patrick, instead of closing these issues, would it make more sense to move them over to another milestone / version? I don't know if the new spec will continue with this JSR number (which I suppose makes it a little difficult to continue tracking issues if they don't continue with the same number (which none of them do from one version to the next)) but some way besides the comments to mark an issue as moved to the next version would be helpful.

        Technically this issue hasn't been closed, but it has been move or tabled for a later date, which is quite different semantically, than closed, imo.

        Show
        lightguard added a comment - Patrick, instead of closing these issues, would it make more sense to move them over to another milestone / version? I don't know if the new spec will continue with this JSR number (which I suppose makes it a little difficult to continue tracking issues if they don't continue with the same number (which none of them do from one version to the next)) but some way besides the comments to mark an issue as moved to the next version would be helpful. Technically this issue hasn't been closed, but it has been move or tabled for a later date, which is quite different semantically, than closed, imo.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            lincolnbaxter
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: