Maybe someone who is subscribed to legal-discuss (I'm not) can post the issue over there and see if there's any consensus, then report the results back here?
On 4/3/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/2/07, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First - it's just a convenience, so you could remove it if you wanted, > with the possible disadvantages that Mike mentioned. > > Second - the files were originally included, I removed them after > licensing issues were mentioned - then there was a lengthy discussion > (which I don't remember anymore), after which I committed them again > as they seemed to be save. > > Typing them in by hand might be a save way to get around all eventual problems. The same issue came up with the Shale 1.0.4 release - Craig was looking at it, but I'm not sure he ever came back on it - relevant posts are here: http://tinyurl.com/2vknhn http://tinyurl.com/2lq3gg Seems like it would be good to resolve once and for all since its affecting several areas of Apache. Niall > regards, > > Martin > > On 4/2/07, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have tools that will create a DTD for a specific xml file. > > Perhaps someone can provide a comprehensive faces-config file matching > > the DTD and I can just parse the DTD from that file? > > > > Seems like that'd be easier (or at least give a better starting point) > > than going from scratch. > > > > > > > > On 4/2/07, Paul McMahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Apr 2, 2007, at 11:38 AM, David Jencks wrote: > > > > > > > Over in geronimo we noticed this text and have responded by: > > > > > > > > 1. for the schemas that we generate code from (using xmlbeans or > > > > jaxb) we checked the schemas into a non-publically-accessible > > > > repository (with our tck stuff) and generate the code there, and > > > > publish source and binary jars, both without the schemas themselves. > > > > > > > > 2. We also have an ongoing effort to produce unencumbered schemas. > > > > Apparently (IANAL) the actual schema/dtd is not copyrightable as it > > > > is an interface specification, the part that is copyrightable is > > > > the comments, annotations, etc. So, we have been typing up the > > > > schemas ourselves without any of the descriptive material. > > > > > > See this JIRA for more details on the effort in Geronimo that David > > > mentioned. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2630 > > > > > > Typing the schemas in by hand is tedious but maybe not so bad if we > > > divide and conquer. I'll volunteer to help if there's a consensus > > > around that approach. There is a utility attached to > > > the JIRA that can be used to compare schemas to make sure they are > > > equivalent. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Paul
