Harmony: project purpose

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
Hi,

Can someone clarify for me why Harmony is being proposed when GNU
Classpath, Kaffe and other projects are quite a long way to satisfying
the goal of a Free Java environment?

Is it:

* That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run the TCK
for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified" free
Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
again from scratch?

* That you feel that more contributors will be involved in an
Apache-licensed project than in a GPL-licensed project, resulting in a
better overall end result? If so, why?

* That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed project is
important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If so, why?
Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
accept a GPL'd one?

* That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is necessary to
start again?

* That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java community
that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted that it
is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?

Regards,

Simon


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

dims
Simon,

People working on Kaffe/Classpath are gonna advise us..see their names
on the proposal :)  We (Apache Gump team) has been working with them
to make Kaffe/Classpath better for a while now
(http://brutus.apache.org/gump/kaffe/buildLog.html). Harmony is going
to increase synergies. We are working in parallel with FSF folks on
the licensing issues as well for while now. Please see the FAQ as
well. we are gonna leverage every bit of code and expertise that we
can to make this happen.

-- dims

On 5/6/05, Simon Kitching <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Can someone clarify for me why Harmony is being proposed when GNU
> Classpath, Kaffe and other projects are quite a long way to satisfying
> the goal of a Free Java environment?
> Is it:
>
> * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run the TCK
> for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified" free
> Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
> again from scratch?
>
> * That you feel that more contributors will be involved in an
> Apache-licensed project than in a GPL-licensed project, resulting in a
> better overall end result? If so, why?
>
> * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed project is
> important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If so, why?
> Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
> accept a GPL'd one?
>
> * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is necessary to
> start again?
>
> * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java community
> that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted that it
> is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?
>
> Regards,
>
> Simon
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

geirm
In reply to this post by Simon Kitching

On May 6, 2005, at 10:26 PM, Simon Kitching wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Can someone clarify for me why Harmony is being proposed when GNU
> Classpath, Kaffe and other projects are quite a long way to satisfying
> the goal of a Free Java environment?
>
> Is it:
>
> * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run the TCK
> for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified" free
> Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
> again from scratch?

No.  I fully expect Sun to grant the TCK to a GPL-licensed project  
when the time is right - I don't think that there are any limitations  
around the license under which an OSS project chooses to work.  
Certainly that isn't what Apache was striving for in it's JCP efforts  
(when Jason Hunter was JCP rep) when the JSPA was changed to allow  
OSS impls, and it's not a limitation we'd support now.

>
> * That you feel that more contributors will be involved in an
> Apache-licensed project than in a GPL-licensed project, resulting in a
> better overall end result? If so, why?

It remains to be seen.  Clearly people have license preferences.

It's clear that there are contributors that only wish to contribute  
to GPL-licensed projects. Similarly, there are contributors that only  
wish to contribute to BSD or other no-copyleft or weak-copyleft  
licenses.

What we're trying to do is two things - do an implementation under  
the Apache License (that's how we license things at the ASF...) but  
at the same time, collaborate with any other interested people,  
communities and organizations so that we can share and interchange as  
much as we can.  And when we fix the license incompatibility issues,  
we'll be able to share more.

>
> * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed project is
> important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If so,  
> why?
> Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
> accept a GPL'd one?

What if you wanted to extend it in a proprietary way?  Suppose you  
had a killer GC implementation that you wanted to try to build a  
business around (ok, farfetched, but you grok the intent...)?  or  
wanted to tune it for your hardware w/o giving what could be  
proprietary techniques away?

I don't want to debate GPL vs AL vs CDDL vs MPL vs ... here.

The fact is, we have a big community around us that has an interest,  
and the ASF is willing (if the PMC approves) to give us a shot to try.

>
> * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is necessary to
> start again?

No.  Kaffe and GNU Classpath people will be participating and  
observing.  This is an open project, and people from Kaffe and GNU  
Classpath have been invited and helped get the conversation started.

Lets bridge these communities in whatever way we can.  We can't do it  
w/ licenses (although we're working on it) so we'll do it w/  
technology and design.

>
> * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java community
> that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted  
> that it
> is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?

No, I don't think that's anyone motivation.  We aren't thinking about  
this as anti-Kaffe or anti-GNU Classpath, but rather pro Java, pro  
independent implementation, and pro community.  We've been building  
relationships and friendships with the people in those communities  
and I'd like to keep working with them, not alienate them.

geir

>
> Regards,
>
> Simon
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

--
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
[hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
In reply to this post by dims
Unfortunately, legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?

If GNU (who presumably have a copyright on all the Classpath code) are
willing to relicense under the APL, then that would work. Same for Kaffe
(though probably more difficult unless Kaffe require copyright
assignment as part of contributions as GNU do). But the proposal
document doesn't state either. Without that, only general "design
principles" can be shared between Harmony and these projects, which
really isn't of much use in the Classpath case as the classes must
adhere to the Sun TCK which must be pretty detailed on library class
behaviour. Sharing design discussions with Kaffe developers may be
somewhat more productive, but even so 90% of the work is in the code -
which cannot be transferred to an APL-licensed project.

This proposal seems *so* much work to reimplement stuff already done
under the GPL (unless that code can be relicensed as described above).
I'm curious to know what the benefit of all that work is..

Regards,

Simon

On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 22:34 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> Simon,
>
> People working on Kaffe/Classpath are gonna advise us..see their names
> on the proposal :)  We (Apache Gump team) has been working with them
> to make Kaffe/Classpath better for a while now
> (http://brutus.apache.org/gump/kaffe/buildLog.html). Harmony is going
> to increase synergies. We are working in parallel with FSF folks on
> the licensing issues as well for while now. Please see the FAQ as
> well. we are gonna leverage every bit of code and expertise that we
> can to make this happen.
>
> -- dims
>
> On 5/6/05, Simon Kitching <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can someone clarify for me why Harmony is being proposed when GNU
> > Classpath, Kaffe and other projects are quite a long way to satisfying
> > the goal of a Free Java environment?
> > Is it:
> >
> > * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run the TCK
> > for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified" free
> > Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
> > again from scratch?
> >
> > * That you feel that more contributors will be involved in an
> > Apache-licensed project than in a GPL-licensed project, resulting in a
> > better overall end result? If so, why?
> >
> > * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed project is
> > important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If so, why?
> > Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
> > accept a GPL'd one?
> >
> > * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is necessary to
> > start again?
> >
> > * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java community
> > that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted that it
> > is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

geirm

On May 6, 2005, at 10:54 PM, Simon Kitching wrote:

> Unfortunately, legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
> ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?

Only if you narrowly define "synergy" to mean combining differently-
licensed code.

>
> If GNU (who presumably have a copyright on all the Classpath code) are
> willing to relicense under the APL, then that would work. Same for  
> Kaffe
> (though probably more difficult unless Kaffe require copyright
> assignment as part of contributions as GNU do). But the proposal
> document doesn't state either.

Right - we want to leave it to whoever shows up to talk about  
whatever they want to do.


> Without that, only general "design
> principles" can be shared between Harmony and these projects, which
> really isn't of much use in the Classpath case as the classes must
> adhere to the Sun TCK which must be pretty detailed on library class
> behaviour.

Except that it's my understanding that the GNU "family" of projects  
(Kaffe, GNU Classpath, GCJ, etc) all want to use GNU Classpath, and  
are working out how to make it pluggable and modular.  We need the  
same thing (would be great to have a VM that we could plug a  
different classlibrary into to get J2ME, for example), so why not  
work together?  Then when we get past the license problem, we can  
intermix.

> Sharing design discussions with Kaffe developers may be
> somewhat more productive, but even so 90% of the work is in the code -
> which cannot be transferred to an APL-licensed project.

I'm not so sure.  There has been *tremendous* amounts of work out  
there thinking about modular platforms, to help get different  
performance profiles, for example.

>
> This proposal seems *so* much work to reimplement stuff already done
> under the GPL (unless that code can be relicensed as described above).
> I'm curious to know what the benefit of all that work is..
>

We'll, come help and find out :)

geir

> Regards,
>
> Simon
>
> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 22:34 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
>> Simon,
>>
>> People working on Kaffe/Classpath are gonna advise us..see their  
>> names
>> on the proposal :)  We (Apache Gump team) has been working with them
>> to make Kaffe/Classpath better for a while now
>> (http://brutus.apache.org/gump/kaffe/buildLog.html). Harmony is going
>> to increase synergies. We are working in parallel with FSF folks on
>> the licensing issues as well for while now. Please see the FAQ as
>> well. we are gonna leverage every bit of code and expertise that we
>> can to make this happen.
>>
>> -- dims
>>
>> On 5/6/05, Simon Kitching <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can someone clarify for me why Harmony is being proposed when GNU
>>> Classpath, Kaffe and other projects are quite a long way to  
>>> satisfying
>>> the goal of a Free Java environment?
>>> Is it:
>>>
>>> * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run  
>>> the TCK
>>> for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified"  
>>> free
>>> Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
>>> again from scratch?
>>>
>>> * That you feel that more contributors will be involved in an
>>> Apache-licensed project than in a GPL-licensed project, resulting  
>>> in a
>>> better overall end result? If so, why?
>>>
>>> * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed  
>>> project is
>>> important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If  
>>> so, why?
>>> Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
>>> accept a GPL'd one?
>>>
>>> * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is  
>>> necessary to
>>> start again?
>>>
>>> * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java  
>>> community
>>> that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted  
>>> that it
>>> is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Sam Ruby-2
In reply to this post by geirm
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
[snip]

Suggestion: the way to encourage people to move to the
[hidden email] mailing list is to stop responding to
questions posted here.

It only encourages them.

- Sam Ruby

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Noel J. Bergman
In reply to this post by Simon Kitching
Simon Kitching wrote:

> legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
> ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?

Not at all.  Individual authors may contribute their own original works, and
do not give up that right.  Furthermore, we can design architectures and
interface specifications that permit pluggability while isolating client
code from the implementation (and license) of the pluggable.  Think how JDBC
or JNDI isolate the code from the service provider classes.  That doesn't
solve distribution issues caused by licensing, but it does address a coding
issue.

Right now we're putting a structure -- process and community -- in place.
The goal is to work WITH others.  As with all other ASF projects, we'll be
very careful about provenance when accepting code.

The Apache Harmony Project is about finding the "harmonics" -- projects and
people with whom to collaborate -- bring them together.  And don't forget
that we have a bunch of harmonics here already.  JNDI code with the
Directory project.  JDBC code with Derby.  Regex code in Jakarta.  APR.
Lots of really good and usable code.  And we already have other people
recommending additional harmonics to work with us.  And some of the
synergies have just amazing potential.

        --- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Henri Yandell
In reply to this post by Sam Ruby-2
On 5/6/05, Sam Ruby <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> Suggestion: the way to encourage people to move to the
> [hidden email] mailing list is to stop responding to
> questions posted here.
>
> It only encourages them.

+1

My new harmony folder is sad without any entries.

Hen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
In reply to this post by Sam Ruby-2
On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:04 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> Suggestion: the way to encourage people to move to the
> [hidden email] mailing list is to stop responding to
> questions posted here.
>
> It only encourages them.

I'm happy to ask future questions on harmony-dev if it is the
appropriate list. However what I am asking about is really related to
*whether* Harmony should be accepted as an Incubator project (ie it's
related to the current VOTE thread on this list). Isn't this list
therefore the correct forum for that discussion?

Please let me know; I'm subscribed to harmony-dev and am happy to follow
up there if it's a better place.

Regards,

Simon



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Geir Magnusson Jr.-2
In reply to this post by Henri Yandell

On May 6, 2005, at 11:12 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:

> On 5/6/05, Sam Ruby <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Suggestion: the way to encourage people to move to the
>> [hidden email] mailing list is to stop  
>> responding to
>> questions posted here.
>>
>> It only encourages them.
>>
>
> +1
>
> My new harmony folder is sad without any entries.

to be fair, we aren't talking about harmony technology, design or  
related, but "meta-harmony" about purpose and motivation...

>
> Hen
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

Mark Wielaard
In reply to this post by dims
Hi,

On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 22:34 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> People working on Kaffe/Classpath are gonna advise us..see their names
> on the proposal :)  We (Apache Gump team) has been working with them
> to make Kaffe/Classpath better for a while now
> (http://brutus.apache.org/gump/kaffe/buildLog.html). Harmony is going
> to increase synergies. We are working in parallel with FSF folks on
> the licensing issues as well for while now. Please see the FAQ as
> well. we are gonna leverage every bit of code and expertise that we
> can to make this happen.

As GNU Classpath maintainer I must admit that I am not 100% happy with
how the announcement came out. I had hoped it would have more emphasized
the fact that we would do everything in our power to work out the
philosophical, legal and practical issues when reusing existing code for
Harmony.

I do however acknowledge that some of the reluctance comes from my side.
I explicitly said that I would not contribute to any Apache licensed
project as long as code distributed under the (L)GPL and ASL couldn't be
mixed into a larger work. That is why there are actually multiple lists
of "interested individuals", some people don't want to contribute to a
new code base that isn't acceptable to both the GNU and the Apache
community. But those people, like me, might still be interested in the
technical discussions around such a new code base (even though the
duplicated effort hurts to even think about).

> On 5/6/05, Simon Kitching <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run the TCK
> > for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified" free
> > Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
> > again from scratch?

Kaffe is currently in the process of getting access to the TCK:
http://www.advogato.org/person/robilad/diary.html?start=64
 
> > * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed project is
> > important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If so, why?
> > Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
> > accept a GPL'd one?

At least for the GNU Classpath project we have a special exception to
the GPL that we think balances the GPL copyleft terms against the need
to attract a wider community helping with the development and
enhancements to our core class library implementation.
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html

If these terms are unclear or might stop certain people from
contributing to GNU Classpath we would like to hear about that.
We setup a wiki for discussion:
http://developer.classpath.org/licensing/

> > * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is necessary to
> > start again?

Obviously I don't think so. But if they are then I want to hear about it
(and fix it). That is why I am here.

> > * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java community
> > that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted that it
> > is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?

It might well be that adding Apache to a name automatically attracts
more contributors then adding GNU to it. If that is true and that would
be the only reason to discard all the work done so far I think I could
convince some people to add "Apache" to their project name and make use
of the apache hosting facilities. Although I believe the FSF savannah
systems are doing just fine.

Cheers,

Mark
--
Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html

Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

geirm
Keeping the crosspost because the some part is relevant to the "meta"  
discussion around the announcement.   Inline....

On May 6, 2005, at 11:31 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 22:34 -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
>> People working on Kaffe/Classpath are gonna advise us..see their  
>> names
>> on the proposal :)  We (Apache Gump team) has been working with them
>> to make Kaffe/Classpath better for a while now
>> (http://brutus.apache.org/gump/kaffe/buildLog.html). Harmony is going
>> to increase synergies. We are working in parallel with FSF folks on
>> the licensing issues as well for while now. Please see the FAQ as
>> well. we are gonna leverage every bit of code and expertise that we
>> can to make this happen.
>>
>
> As GNU Classpath maintainer I must admit that I am not 100% happy with
> how the announcement came out. I had hoped it would have more  
> emphasized
> the fact that we would do everything in our power to work out the
> philosophical, legal and practical issues when reusing existing  
> code for
> Harmony.

For this I apologize.  I could have done a better job of working with  
you to get that message across.  You were very clear in our  
discussions that this was of significant interest to you.

>
> I do however acknowledge that some of the reluctance comes from my  
> side.
> I explicitly said that I would not contribute to any Apache licensed
> project as long as code distributed under the (L)GPL and ASL  
> couldn't be
> mixed into a larger work. That is why there are actually multiple  
> lists
> of "interested individuals", some people don't want to contribute to a
> new code base that isn't acceptable to both the GNU and the Apache
> community. But those people, like me, might still be interested in the
> technical discussions around such a new code base (even though the
> duplicated effort hurts to even think about).

+1 :)

>
>
>> On 5/6/05, Simon Kitching <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> * That SUN is not expected to ever grant a free license to run  
>>> the TCK
>>> for a GPL-licensed project, so the only way to get a "certified"  
>>> free
>>> Java implementation is to ignore the existing GPL'd stuff and start
>>> again from scratch?
>>>
>
> Kaffe is currently in the process of getting access to the TCK:
> http://www.advogato.org/person/robilad/diary.html?start=64
>
>
>>> * That you feel that the availability of an Apache-licensed  
>>> project is
>>> important enough to duplicate all the existing GPL'd effort? If  
>>> so, why?
>>> Who in particular wants an Apache-licensed implementation and can't
>>> accept a GPL'd one?
>>>
>
> At least for the GNU Classpath project we have a special exception to
> the GPL that we think balances the GPL copyleft terms against the need
> to attract a wider community helping with the development and
> enhancements to our core class library implementation.
> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html
>
> If these terms are unclear or might stop certain people from
> contributing to GNU Classpath we would like to hear about that.
> We setup a wiki for discussion:
> http://developer.classpath.org/licensing/
>
>
>>> * That Kaffe/Classpath are somehow flawed and that it is  
>>> necessary to
>>> start again?
>>>
>
> Obviously I don't think so. But if they are then I want to hear  
> about it
> (and fix it). That is why I am here.
>
>
>>> * That because Apache is a well-respected player in the Java  
>>> community
>>> that a project hosted at Apache will be so much better accepted  
>>> that it
>>> is worth discarding all the Kaffe/Classpath work done so far?
>>>
>
> It might well be that adding Apache to a name automatically attracts
> more contributors then adding GNU to it. If that is true and that  
> would
> be the only reason to discard all the work done so far I think I could
> convince some people to add "Apache" to their project name and make  
> use
> of the apache hosting facilities. Although I believe the FSF savannah
> systems are doing just fine.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
> --
> Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
>
> Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/
>




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
In reply to this post by Noel J. Bergman
On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:10 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

> Simon Kitching wrote:
>
> > legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
> > ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?
>
> Not at all.  Individual authors may contribute their own original works, and
> do not give up that right.  Furthermore, we can design architectures and
> interface specifications that permit pluggability while isolating client
> code from the implementation (and license) of the pluggable.  Think how JDBC
> or JNDI isolate the code from the service provider classes.  That doesn't
> solve distribution issues caused by licensing, but it does address a coding
> issue.
>
> Right now we're putting a structure -- process and community -- in place.
> The goal is to work WITH others.  As with all other ASF projects, we'll be
> very careful about provenance when accepting code.

But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the existing GNU
Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within th
>
> The Apache Harmony Project is about finding the "harmonics" -- projects and
> people with whom to collaborate -- bring them together.  And don't forget
> that we have a bunch of harmonics here already.  JNDI code with the
> Directory project.  JDBC code with Derby.  Regex code in Jakarta.  APR.
> Lots of really good and usable code.  And we already have other people
> recommending additional harmonics to work with us.  And some of the
> synergies have just amazing potential.

>
> --- Noel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
Sorry, the previous email was sent incomplete. I'll try again..

On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 15:45 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:10 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Simon Kitching wrote:
> >
> > > legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
> > > ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?
> >
> > Not at all.  Individual authors may contribute their own original works, and
> > do not give up that right.  Furthermore, we can design architectures and
> > interface specifications that permit pluggability while isolating client
> > code from the implementation (and license) of the pluggable.  Think how JDBC
> > or JNDI isolate the code from the service provider classes.  That doesn't
> > solve distribution issues caused by licensing, but it does address a coding
> > issue.
> >
> > Right now we're putting a structure -- process and community -- in place.
> > The goal is to work WITH others.  As with all other ASF projects, we'll be
> > very careful about provenance when accepting code.
>
But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the existing GNU
Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within them?

Classpath appears to have no current competitors; it is clearly *the*
free java class library implementation. And while the GPL/LGPL may not
be the perfect license for every situation it seems perfectly reasonable
to me here. Geir indicated in a reply to my earlier posting that there
were no specific objections to the Classpath license.

Creating a new project whose purpose is to implement the java core
libraries surely *must* draw developers away from contributing to GNU
Classpath, as well as wasting vasts amount of programmer time (unless
major relicensing from GNU Classpath is possible). I still don't
understand what benefits might arise from this.

The JVM (ie reimplementing what Kaffe does) is a similar situation. What
gain is there to create another JVM rather than joining the existing
Kaffe project and working within it?

Regards,

Simon



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Simon Kitching
On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 15:52 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:

> Sorry, the previous email was sent incomplete. I'll try again..
>
> On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 15:45 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:10 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > > Simon Kitching wrote:
> > >
> > > > legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
> > > > ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?
> > >
> > > Not at all.  Individual authors may contribute their own original works, and
> > > do not give up that right.  Furthermore, we can design architectures and
> > > interface specifications that permit pluggability while isolating client
> > > code from the implementation (and license) of the pluggable.  Think how JDBC
> > > or JNDI isolate the code from the service provider classes.  That doesn't
> > > solve distribution issues caused by licensing, but it does address a coding
> > > issue.
> > >
> > > Right now we're putting a structure -- process and community -- in place.
> > > The goal is to work WITH others.  As with all other ASF projects, we'll be
> > > very careful about provenance when accepting code.
> >
> But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the existing GNU
> Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within them?
>
> Classpath appears to have no current competitors; it is clearly *the*
> free java class library implementation. And while the GPL/LGPL may not
> be the perfect license for every situation it seems perfectly reasonable
> to me here. Geir indicated in a reply to my earlier posting that there
> were no specific objections to the Classpath license.
>
> Creating a new project whose purpose is to implement the java core
> libraries surely *must* draw developers away from contributing to GNU
> Classpath, as well as wasting vasts amount of programmer time (unless
> major relicensing from GNU Classpath is possible). I still don't
> understand what benefits might arise from this.

Sorry, I misrepresented Geir a bit here. Geir *did* indicate a
hypothetical situation in which a company could generate a proprietory
product based on an APL classlib but not a GPL'd one.

The example is fairly unlikely, though. I personally feel that the
possible gain by allowing this doesn't make up for the damage likely to
be done to GNU Classpath by drawing developers/users from that project.

Note that Classpath implements *exactly* the Sun specs. So there isn't
much room for proprietory innovation (which is what APL would allow).

>
> The JVM (ie reimplementing what Kaffe does) is a similar situation. What
> gain is there to create another JVM rather than joining the existing
> Kaffe project and working within it?

Kaffe *is* a little different. I can see companies adapting an existing
JVM to perform proprietory stuff, even to implementing proprietory
(non-java) languages (or, as in Geir's example, optimising for a
particular hardware platform). And an APL'd version would allow
developers to learn how a VM implementation works without any worries
about future accusations of violating the GPL by copying into a later
proprietory project.

I still personally would like to see Kaffe complete before a competing
project is started, though.

Regards,

Simon


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Noel J. Bergman
In reply to this post by Mark Wielaard
Mark Wielaard wrote:

> I had hoped it would have more emphasized the fact that we would do
> everything in our power to work out the philosophical, legal and
> practical issues when reusing existing code for Harmony.

Well, I think it does try, but at this point it must be more important how
we go on from here.  :-)  And your expression is an important part of that
process.

> I explicitly said that I would not contribute to any Apache licensed
> project as long as code distributed under the (L)GPL and ASL couldn't
> be mixed into a larger work.

You are aware that the ASF and FSF are trying to address the issues, and
this effort may help move that along.

> At least for the GNU Classpath project we have a special exception

And we're still trying to work out some issues with the FSF there.  Unless
there has been a breakthrough recently, we posed very specific use cases,
and have as yet not gotten the necessary response.

> Kaffe is currently in the process of getting access to the TCK:
> http://www.advogato.org/person/robilad/diary.html?start=64

The aforementioned issues between GPL and AL aside, I am still trying to see
how the TCK licensing restrictions are compatible with the GPL.  According
to the FSF licensing page, the Apache License is deemed by the FSF to be
"incompatible with the GPL because it has a specific requirement that is not
in the GPL."  So how much worse are the TCK licensing restrictions?  For
examples, see the modified version of the AL that has been drafted for
dealing with JSR's:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/proposed/JSR-LICENSE-2.0.txt.  As I read
things, it really does not seem possible to meet the requirements of both
the GPL and the Java licenses.  And any bending necessary to accept the TCK
terms should help to address the AL issue as well.

        --- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Harmony: project purpose

geirm
In reply to this post by Simon Kitching

On May 7, 2005, at 12:05 AM, Simon Kitching wrote:

> On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 15:52 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:
>
>> Sorry, the previous email was sent incomplete. I'll try again..
>>
>> On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 15:45 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:10 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Simon Kitching wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> legally isn't it impossible for a GPL'd project and an
>>>>> ASF'd project to *have* "synergies"?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not at all.  Individual authors may contribute their own  
>>>> original works, and
>>>> do not give up that right.  Furthermore, we can design  
>>>> architectures and
>>>> interface specifications that permit pluggability while  
>>>> isolating client
>>>> code from the implementation (and license) of the pluggable.  
>>>> Think how JDBC
>>>> or JNDI isolate the code from the service provider classes.  
>>>> That doesn't
>>>> solve distribution issues caused by licensing, but it does  
>>>> address a coding
>>>> issue.
>>>>
>>>> Right now we're putting a structure -- process and community --  
>>>> in place.
>>>> The goal is to work WITH others.  As with all other ASF  
>>>> projects, we'll be
>>>> very careful about provenance when accepting code.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the  
>> existing GNU
>> Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within them?
>>
>> Classpath appears to have no current competitors; it is clearly *the*
>> free java class library implementation. And while the GPL/LGPL may  
>> not
>> be the perfect license for every situation it seems perfectly  
>> reasonable
>> to me here. Geir indicated in a reply to my earlier posting that  
>> there
>> were no specific objections to the Classpath license.
>>
>> Creating a new project whose purpose is to implement the java core
>> libraries surely *must* draw developers away from contributing to GNU
>> Classpath, as well as wasting vasts amount of programmer time (unless
>> major relicensing from GNU Classpath is possible). I still don't
>> understand what benefits might arise from this.
>>
>
> Sorry, I misrepresented Geir a bit here. Geir *did* indicate a
> hypothetical situation in which a company could generate a proprietory
> product based on an APL classlib but not a GPL'd one.
>

Thank you.  The GPL isn't ok for ASF project, and I don't believe  
that I have said anything to indicate otherwise.

The GPL isn't the license of choice for many people, including me,  
just like the AL isn't for many...  As you can see, I'm not  
interested in a license debate.  I had a long one with Dalibor and  
Simon Phipps in Brazil - the only solution we could come up with the  
resolve things was to eat more of the excellent beef they serve  
there.  We did that several nights in a row :)

> The example is fairly unlikely, though. I personally feel that the
> possible gain by allowing this doesn't make up for the damage  
> likely to
> be done to GNU Classpath by drawing developers/users from that  
> project.
>
> Note that Classpath implements *exactly* the Sun specs. So there isn't
> much room for proprietory innovation (which is what APL would allow).

Well, I would think there are plenty of places for proprietary (and  
otherwise) innovation in the class library.  The API and behavior  
must be compatible, but how you get there is up to you.

>
>
>>
>> The JVM (ie reimplementing what Kaffe does) is a similar  
>> situation. What
>> gain is there to create another JVM rather than joining the existing
>> Kaffe project and working within it?
>>
>
> Kaffe *is* a little different. I can see companies adapting an  
> existing
> JVM to perform proprietory stuff, even to implementing proprietory
> (non-java) languages (or, as in Geir's example, optimising for a
> particular hardware platform). And an APL'd version would allow
> developers to learn how a VM implementation works without any worries
> about future accusations of violating the GPL by copying into a later
> proprietory project.
>
> I still personally would like to see Kaffe complete before a competing
> project is started, though.

I personally wish Kaffe well, and have no interest in hurting it.  I  
have every interest in working with Dalibor and meeting other Kaffe  
people, and hope that where we can work together is productive for  
them, for us, and any other VM project out there.

I think that it's way too early in this "New Era of Managed Runtime  
Environments" to think that one is enough, no matter what the licensing.

geir

--
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
[hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Noel J. Bergman
In reply to this post by Simon Kitching
> But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the existing GNU
> Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within them?

> Geir indicated in a reply to my earlier posting that there were
> no specific objections to the Classpath license.

There is a list of issues with both the LGPL and the GPL+Exception for which
I do not believe we have satisfactory answers.  There is an on-going effort
to get the issues resolved, and that could be part of what comes out of
Harmony.  Remember that Harmony is about creating a reusable and free Java
platform.  It would not have to recreate Classpath if Classpath were
available to use.  As Mark noted in his e-mail, that is not currently the
case.

        --- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Mark Wielaard
In reply to this post by Noel J. Bergman
Hi,

On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 00:20 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> > I had hoped it would have more emphasized the fact that we would do
> > everything in our power to work out the philosophical, legal and
> > practical issues when reusing existing code for Harmony.
>
> Well, I think it does try, but at this point it must be more important how
> we go on from here.  :-)  And your expression is an important part of that
> process.

Thanks. I feel it is important that we build bridges between the Apache
and GNU communities whenever possible.

> > I explicitly said that I would not contribute to any Apache licensed
> > project as long as code distributed under the (L)GPL and ASL couldn't
> > be mixed into a larger work.
>
> You are aware that the ASF and FSF are trying to address the issues, and
> this effort may help move that along.
>
> > At least for the GNU Classpath project we have a special exception
>
> And we're still trying to work out some issues with the FSF there.  Unless
> there has been a breakthrough recently, we posed very specific use cases,
> and have as yet not gotten the necessary response.
I didn't realize these were for the GNU Classpath license. Which you can
read here: http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html
I thought these questions were in connection with the LGPL and how to
interpret the explanation posted by the FSF here:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html

I'll make sure I talk to one of the FSF legal people again to make sure
there is progress in these discussions. Some people are setting up a new
teleconference between the ASF and FSF to talk about these issues more
directly.

> > Kaffe is currently in the process of getting access to the TCK:
> > http://www.advogato.org/person/robilad/diary.html?start=64
>
> The aforementioned issues between GPL and AL aside, I am still trying to see
> how the TCK licensing restrictions are compatible with the GPL.

I am not a party in these discussions. And as I understood from Dalibor
from the Kaffe team the actual terms are still under discussion and
confidential at the moment. So I am not sure they can already tell how
and if Sun wants to handle this.

Cheers,

Mark
--
Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html

Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Harmony: project purpose

Mark Wielaard
In reply to this post by Noel J. Bergman
Hi,

On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 00:26 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

> > But why bother to "work with others"? Why not just join the existing GNU
> > Classpath and Kaffe projects and work within them?
>
> > Geir indicated in a reply to my earlier posting that there were
> > no specific objections to the Classpath license.
>
> There is a list of issues with both the LGPL and the GPL+Exception for which
> I do not believe we have satisfactory answers.  There is an on-going effort
> to get the issues resolved, and that could be part of what comes out of
> Harmony.  Remember that Harmony is about creating a reusable and free Java
> platform.  It would not have to recreate Classpath if Classpath were
> available to use.  As Mark noted in his e-mail, that is not currently the
> case.
Just to be completely clear about the issues.
Obviously it is hard to "just solve" the general (L)GPL and ASL
incompatabilities. But I have some hope that we know what the legal
issues are now and that there can be some general resolution to make
mixing and matching code from the two community possible in the future.

For the specific case of GNU Classpath being integrated into a larger
"Harmony" work the issue is a little simpler. All copyright in this work
are assigned to the FSF and we already have a special exception that
allows the core class libraries to be used by a project distributed
under the ASL. At least that is what we think. If that is currently not
the case then we will certainly change the wording of the specific GPL
exception statement as used by GNU Classpath to make that more clear.

If we want to integrate any new code produced by the Harmany effort into
any of the existing projects, many of which are under the GPL or only
accept code compatible with the GPL, and since the Apache Incubator
terms allow modern BSD, MIT/X or MIT/W3C terms I think that is probably
the best we can do for now. But as said before if we can (ab)use the
Harmony project to get a strong signal to BOTH the FSF and ASF to fix
any remaining incompatabilities between (L)GPL and ASL then lets do
that!

Cheers,

Mark
--
Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html

Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
12
Loading...