[JSR358-84] Need a complete answer on the ASLv2 incompatibility issue Created: 02/Oct/14  Updated: 02/Oct/14

Status: Open
Project: jsr358
Component/s: Compatibility, Licensing
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: starksm64 Assignee: pcurran
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


 Description   

We and other EC members continue to be wonder why there is not a simple solution to the issue of inclusion of ASLv2 licensed software into Java platform JSRs. At the last Java EC face to face meeting, there was a reference to http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html, but no answers to basic followup questions.

We would like to understand why, in the Specification Lead's view, ASFv2 licensed software should not be included in Java platform JSRs under these revisions. We observe that the current GPLv2+classpath exception license used by the platforms seems to allow for the inclusion of such code. An explanation beyond referencing http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html would be appreciated. Oracle's position as copyright holder and ability to relicense the Java platform on commercial terms should be addressed in the answer.






[JSR358-93] Create a standard Spec license Created: 07/Mar/15  Updated: 07/Mar/15

Status: Open
Project: jsr358
Component/s: Compatibility, Licensing
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: New Feature Priority: Major
Reporter: pcurran Assignee: pcurran
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


 Description   

We have an "almost-standard" Spec license that is used for almost all JSRs. It's time to standardize this and to make its use compulsory.






[JSR358-22] Clarify Compatibility policy Created: 06/Jul/12  Updated: 01/Apr/15

Status: Open
Project: jsr358
Component/s: Compatibility
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: pcurran Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


 Description   

Sun/Oracle have consistently insisted on strong compatibility requirements that prohibit incompatible implementations.

Others argue that incompatible implementations are permissible so long as these do not use the Java name.

Ensure that the JSPA defines a clear policy on compatibility and that this is addressed in any recommended or required licenses.

Should we continue to insist that compatibility is binary, or should we permit incompatible implementations under some circumstances? (E.g. the Transplant JSR proposal from JSR 306.)






Generated at Thu May 07 04:42:44 UTC 2015 using JIRA 6.2.3#6260-sha1:63ef1d6dac3f4f4d7db4c1effd405ba38ccdc558.