[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
|
Hi Ed,
The LGPL and EPL remain incompatible and unfortunately, the statement below
does nothing to change that.
Regards,
Janet
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Merks [mailto:merks@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 7:54 AM
To: Janet Campbell
Cc: 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'; mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'PMC members
mailing list'; modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
Janet,
I've been chatting with Martin about Teneo's long term plans and indeed he
is already working closely with the EclipseLink folks (Shaun Smith and
Stephan Eberle) with the goal of integrating Teneo with the EclipseLink
runtime when that becomes available at Eclipse. This would provide
commercial vendors with all of Teneo's current capabilities in a form
perhaps more easily useable in commercial products while also continuing to
support the existing community that is depending on what remains today's
most popular and mature object persistence architecture. (Does this give
you warmer fuzzier feelings Mike?)
Given all the discussion around EPL and LGPL compatibility, I wonder if you
could comment on this explicit statement at
http://www.hibernate.org/356.html:
The LGPL license is sufficiently flexible to allow the use of Hibernate
in both open source and commercial projects. The LGPL guarantees that
Hibernate and any modifications made to Hibernate will stay open source,
protecting our and your work. Anyone who wanted to release Hibernate
under a different license would have to obtain permission from hundreds
of people who have contributed code to Hibernate, which would be
impractical. Hibernate is and will be open source distributed under the
LGPL.
Using Hibernate (by importing Hibernate's public interfaces in your Java
code), and extending Hibernate (by subclassing or implementation of an
extension interface) is considered by the authors of Hibernate to be
dynamic linking. Hence our interpretation of the LGPL is that the use of
the unmodified Hibernate source does not affect the license of your
application code.
The use of the unmodified Hibernate binary of course never affects the
license of your application or distribution. The LGPL also forbids
distribution for profit, so you will never have to pay money to any
commercial entity for using or integrating Hibernate.
If you modify Hibernate and redistribute your modifications, the LGPL
applies. Please submit any modifications to our JIRA issue tracking
system.
It seems to be a clear statement that Hibernate can be used in commercial
products. The second paragraph in particular, makes a very specific
statement of how the use of Hibernate is to be interpreted relative to the
LGPL license. Do these clear and specific statements carry sufficient
legal weight to make Hibernate compatible with EPL? I believe that is the
intent behind these statements...
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Janet Campbell"
<janet.campbell@e
clipse.org> To
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
04/15/2007 09:21 cc
AM "'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
<bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'PMC members mailing list'"
<modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
<modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
<mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
RE: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
To clarify - changes are coming. The details of those proposed changes
will
be circulated to all Board members prior to the meeting where the issue
will
be discussed. We will make every effort to ensure that all Board members
have an opportunity to review the material and discuss the potential
changes
with stakeholders prior to the meeting.
Janet
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Merks [mailto:merks@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 9:02 AM
To: Janet Campbell
Cc: 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'; 'PMC members mailing list';
modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
Janet,
Your answer in this note chain is a little less clear that your clear
statement in November of 2005:
'You are correct, as long as the GPL or LGPL code is downloaded by the
client separately and not made part of the Eclipse code base we are fine
with it.'
Could I as a board member find out more about what the new concerns are,
who shares those concerns, and what steps are being taken to address those
concerns? Obviously one of my concerns will be any adverse impact of such
changes on committers and community members who are currently following the
clear advice given in the past, so I'd like to be well informed in
preparation for the board meeting. Given Mike's reaction so far, folks
like Martin are obviously already very concerned, perhaps unduly or perhaps
with good cause.
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Janet Campbell"
<janet.campbell@e
clipse.org> To
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
04/13/2007 02:37 cc
PM "'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
<bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'PMC members mailing list'"
<modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
"'mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx, PMC
members mailing list'"
<modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
<modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
RE: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
I've had a look through my email and Ed and I discussed this in November
2005. We have had a number of Committers and Members ask for clarification
on our policy with respect to works-with and pre-req dependencies since
that
time. Some concerns have also been expressed regarding the potential
impact
of having dependencies with unfriendly licenses or known pedigree concerns.
As a result, we asked the IP Advisory Committee to give us some guidance on
how to proceed and we will be rolling out some changes to address this
issue. The proposed changes will be discussed at an upcoming Board meeting
and I would encourage you to raise any concerns you may have at that time.
Regards,
Janet
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Merks [mailto:merks@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:05 AM
To: PMC members mailing list
Cc: Bjorn Freeman-Benson; 'Janet Campbell'; mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx,
PMC members mailing list; modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
Rich,
I see you're surprised too. From other note threads I've been forwarded,
I get the sense that there are retroactive IP changes in the works, but I'm
not sure that many of the board members are aware that such changes might
be in the works. I would certainly be very annoyed to be told that
providing integration with Hibernate, the most popular and widely used
persistence architecture, is suddenly and retroactively taboo at Eclipse.
That really doesn't sound very open to me and in general, retroactively
disallowing something previously allowed is not a fair or reasonable way to
treat the community. Martin's Teneo project has been providing value to
the community for years, and his helpfulness in the newsgroup is exemplary,
so even this approach of publicly singling out Teneo for renewed scrutiny
doesn't seem like the most diplomatic way to make inquiries. It might have
been more diplomatic to have started by talking to Janet about the review
history first rather than by dumping a problem that needs to be solved on
the PMC. I certainly expect Janet to respond with a yes, otherwise my
comments about her having reviewed and approved the project would have been
false; I don't make a habit of doing that. So that yes answer will beg
the question, how can something that's approved suddenly be a problem?
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
Richard Gronback
<richard.gronback
@borland.com> To
Sent by: "mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx, PMC
modeling-pmc-boun members mailing list"
ces@xxxxxxxxxxx <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Janet
Campbell'"
<janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
04/13/2007 06:40 cc
AM Bjorn Freeman-Benson
<bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
Please respond to Re: [modeling-pmc] FW: Teneo
PMC members
mailing list
<modeling-pmc@ecl
ipse.org>
Is this ?prereq?ing? restriction something new?
Thanks,
Rich
On 4/12/07 10:31 PM, "Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Janet,
Were you aware that Teneo was prereq?ing LGPL code?
Mike Milinkovich
Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228
Mobile: +1.613.220.3223
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
From: Ed Merks [mailto:merks@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:22 PM
To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'; 'Janet Campbell';
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx; mtaal@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Teneo
Mike,
Teneo was fully reviewed by Janet in its present form, i.e., with
these known dependencies. It does not redistribute any GPL/LGPL
code; the necessary jar must be downloaded separately by the client.
Hibernate is a very popular technology, so providing integration for
it has great value, despite the licensing concerns.
http://www2.sys-con.com/java/readerschoice2004/frameliveupdate.cfm?BType=17
Teneo also supports JPA and JDO. Note that Shaun Smith and Stefan
Eberle (two guys working EclipseLink) were recently added as
committers to Teneo so that the overlap between their EMF persistence
work for EclipseLink and Martin's EMF persistence work for Teneo can
be reconciled into more cohesive overall solution. There is overlap,
but also lots of complementary things. It's a great example of how
well our community functions. (Martin's support for clients on the
newsgroup is remarkable!)
Note that extended capabilities such as those provided by Teneo are
what's helping to make modeling so popular:
http://www2.sys-con.com/java/readerschoice2004/frameliveupdate.cfm?BType=11
http://www2.sys-con.com/java/readerschoice2004/frameliveupdate.cfm?BType=14
Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
"Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> 04/11/2007 03:03
PM
Please respond to
<mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'"
<bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Janet Campbell'"
<janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject Teneo
Ed,
I?m sending this to you as the project leader for EMFT.
I stumbled across Teneo <http://www.eclipse.org/emft/projects/teneo/>
this morning and would like to make you aware of an issue with it
that needs to be resolved. Teneo?s dependence on Hibernate --- which
is licensed under the LGPL --- is a problem, as the LGPL and EPL are
incompatible. Is there not another open source persistence solution
(Castor, EclipseLink) which can be used instead?
Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director
Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
Office: +1.613.224.9461 x228
Mobile: +1.613.220.3223
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
blog: http://milinkovich.blogspot.com
<http://milinkovich.blogspot.com/>
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
--
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
