[JSR 358 Observer] [JSR358 EG] Re: Re: Definition of Spec
- From: Werner Keil <
- Subject: [JSR 358 Observer] [JSR358 EG] Re: Re: Definition of Spec
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:51:50 +0100
- List-id: <experts.jsr358.java.net>
Indeed, the question, what artifacts actually fall under which license is closely related to the whole "Standard License" question.
Fact is,many Spec Leads (so far those of Batch JSR seem to be among them, every Spec Lead from either Red Hat or Google/Bob Lee also seems to share this view or confirmed it when I asked them) assumes, every single "application programming interface" (especially public class or interface declarations whose names begin with "java", "javax" according to the process doc) are licensed under the RI/TCK license they chose, e.g. Apache, or others and the "Spec License" only applies to the accompanying plain text description of the Spec.
Furthermore, those Spec Leads have also applied this view of the license in JSRs already released, including but maybe not limited to 330, 299 (CDI) or 303 (Bean Validation)
I personally see no problem with it, but I am not sure, if it goes along with the Process or JSPA, see the definition of "Specifiation" there?
If nobody else believes that interpretation is a problem, then no action is required. If anybody including the PMO or Oracle Legal feels that's a problem, we should deal with this in the 358 EG.
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Steve Wolfe <
Werner,Werner Keil ---01/29/2013 09:46:31 AM---Hi, Based on findings e.g. with Java Batch JSR (or earlier JSR 330) I was
From: Werner Keil <
To: JSR 358 Expert Group <
Date: 01/29/2013 09:46 AM
Subject: [JSR358 EG] Definition of Spec
I can only speak for the Batch JSR, but I don't understand your question or who you are asking it of? The JSR 358 EG?
Based on findings e.g. with Java Batch JSR (or earlier JSR 330) I was wondering, if the assumption by Spec Leads of these JSRs is correct or you (EG or Oracle, including Legal) has a different opinion on that?
>All JavaDoc, API jars, RI and TCK are "Apache Licensed" (an example for any of the Common Licenses) for "JSR XYZ". Only the PDF spec document has >another (JCP) license.
Thanks and Regards,
Description: GIF image