Re: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assist pro

[James Moody <James_Moody@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi again Mark,

Yes, I've contacted an Eclipse IP person,
I think they'll probably have some questions, which I will relay to you
if I can't answer them.

Re-reading your donation proposal, I
just wanted to clarify one aspect. Did you envision this jBPM-BPEL code
"living" on Eclipse.org? I.e. developed henceforth in our CVS
repository? Or simply available under a friendly license to aid in the
development of our runtime framework and reference glue code? If the former,
that might be problematic for a couple of reasons, namely that owning a
runtime is explicitly outside the scope of our project goals, as well as
potential license issues (there may be issues with having non-EPL code
living on Eclipse.org but again I'm not a lawyer). If the latter, fantastic
- this is what I had asked the IP guy about and hope to have more information
soon.

james


bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 05/09/2006 08:32:19
AM:

> James, did you ask the "Eclipse IP person/people to take a look"?
> 
> Mark.
> 
> 
> James Moody wrote:
> >
> > Hello Mark,
> >
> > This looks very interesting! From the jBPM-BPEL roadmap that
you 
> > outline below, it looks like your dates will line up nicely with
those 
> > of this project (allowing of course for whatever changes are
necessary 
> > when WS-BPEL 2.0 is completed).  I believe this move will
certainly 
> > benefit the community.
> >
> > I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment on the license-related issues,
> > except to say that we should get the Eclipse IP person/people
to take 
> > a look and confim that it makes them happy.
> >
> > Bruno: as you've taken a look at the issue of a runtime framework,
I'd 
> > appreciate it if you could add any comments here.
> >
> > Let's continue the discussion here of how to proceed on the design
of 
> > this framework and how to carve up the work among those involved.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > james