Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [cosmos-dev] [*** SPAM ***]Re: Re: Dojo toolkit legal issuesare gone 
Sheldon, Martin Simmonds had reported a situation where access to the
dojo site was intermittently unavailable for him, and we should keep in
mind that a dependency on a remote resource has implications for
performance and stability.  IIRC a user could install dojo himself, and
the cosmos software could use this local instance, but how to do this
should perhaps be documented in our installation guide.

Jack

-----Original Message-----
From: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sheldon Lee-Loy
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 2:51 PM
To: Cosmos Dev
Cc: cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx; cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cosmos-dev] [*** SPAM ***]Re: Re: Dojo toolkit legal
issuesare gone


Thanks Bjorn,

>From reading the Eclipse Policy and Procedure document it seems that a
pre-req may be classified as 'exempt'.

a. A pre-req may be classified as "exempt" by the EMO if the software is
pervasive in nature, expected to be already on the user's machine,
and/or
an IP review would be either impossible, impractical, or inadvisable.
Exempt pre-req's can be approved for use
by the EMO without IP review. Examples: Windows XP, Sun JRE. However, an
exempt pre-req may be disallowed by the EMO at its discretion.

Dojo pre-req for COSMOS might fit into this clasification for the
following
reasons.

   It is expected that the user be connected to the web where DOJO is
   expected to be hosted on the Content Delivery Network at
   http://o.aolcdn.com/dojo/1.0.0/dojo/dojo.xd.js.uncompressed.js

Bjorn,
Is there an official process to submit a proposal to the Technology PMC?
If not what mailling list do I submit my proposal?  Sorry for my
ignorance.


Thanks,

Sheldon
______________________________________
Sheldon Lee-Loy



 

             Bjorn

             Freeman-Benson

             <bjorn.freeman-be
To 
             nson@xxxxxxxxxxx>         cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

             Sent by:
cc 
             cosmos-dev-bounce

             s@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject 
                                       [cosmos-dev] [*** SPAM ***]Re:
Re:  
                                       Dojo toolkit legal issues are

             02/07/2008 02:14          gone

             PM

 

 

             Please respond to

                Cosmos Dev

             <cosmos-dev@eclip

                  se.org>

 

 





Regarding Harm's comment below about "there must be some rule about not
needing to clear operating systems" - he is correct, and here is that
rule:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3r
d_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf

The Technology PMC would be happy to entertain a proposal from the
COSMOS
project about Dojo as per that policy.

As for the difference between the difference between an Eclipse
Project's
website and code distributed by an Eclipse Project: yes, there is a
difference. Eclipse Members do not build products on top of the websites
but they do build products on top of the projects. Thus the IP rules for
the project releases are stricter than the project websites.

- Bjorn

P.S. Sorry about the delayed reply. While I read all the dev lists, I do
so
in batches about once a month, so I didn't catch this email right away.
(An
email cc'd to me as well as the list would get to me faster.)

      Interestingly I mentioned the alternate approach to Sheldon
because
      at the time each release level of the dojo toolkit was being IP
      checked and they change quickly, while in the meantime the
question
      of including it in the packaging was being discussed. I recall
      Sheldon took the approach of making this configurable so you could
      work with what ever compatible dojo variant and location you
wanted.

      Bjorn clearly has the say on this as your PMC lead and as one of
the
      few people that know the rules due to extreme exposure ;-),
      Requiring an operating system I gather is simply considered
      reasonable, as is the Java runtime, I believe you will find
sprinkled
      through the Eclipse.org website URLs to company websites, that may
or
      may not contain javascript, that are clearly not EPL. This part of
      COSMOS has to be hosted on some web server before it will
"function"
      but I don't think COSMOS is expected to get IP approval for a
server
      or specify a specific dependancy on Tomcat. Even if DOJO is
cleared
      it relies on the browser to work and I don't think we are getting
      firefox and IE cleared ;-). I think you can find some javascript
on
      the eclipse.org as well.

      So there is some boundary that I could not find stated somewhere.

      So my question would be about the criteria that says a URL on the
      website can point to non EPL, yet a url in some javascript web
from a
      project requires IP approval. I can imagine a fuzzy discussion
about
      the functioning of a website versus the functioning of a website
that
      is the project product, but this may be something to get cleared
up
      at the foundation level since web interfaces are becoming of
greater
      interest to the Eclipse community at large. It seems the
eclipse.org
      website is the product of a project as well ;-)
      COSMOS may be on the bleeding edge here.

--
[end of message]_______________________________________________
cosmos-dev mailing list
cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmos-dev


_______________________________________________
cosmos-dev mailing list
cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmos-dev

Back to the top