[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[technology-pmc] Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
|
My apologies - sent this to Bjorn directly.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
----- Forwarded by Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM on 02/22/2008 02:12 PM
-----
Michael A
Squillace/Austin/
IBM To
bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxx
02/21/2008 09:56 cc
AM
Subject
Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Bjorn:
Following Barb's advice, I'm deferring to you for a statement.
When we last spoke, you granted an exempt-prereq for the
IAccessible2Proxy.dll, arguing that it was likely already on end-users
machines. (I can't find that note but would like to have it for my
reference if you can find it.) That dll simply wraps the definition of the
IAccessible2 API defined by an IDL file so that COM can find the methods
and signatures of methods in the IA2 API.
The issue now is that the idl at:
http://accessibility.freestandards.org/a11yspecs/ia2/ia2_api_all.idl
is governed by the LGPL along with any .c or .h files generated during a
build using this file. In CQ 1916:
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1916
it was determined that neither the idl nor the generated files could be
committed to the Eclipse ACTF CVS repository. However, our colleagues in
Japan our arguing that a dll we build using this idl, one that is already
on eclipse.org as a part of a tool called Accessibility Probe:
http://www.eclipse.org/actf/downloads/tools/accprobe/index.php
and in the CVS repository falls under the LGPL and, hence, requires
separate consideration. Since IAccessible2Proxy.dll has already gotten an
exempt-prereq and since the idl is not actually shipped but only used
during the build process, I am hoping that our own dll can be shipped along
with AccProbe.
If you find this confusing, pls let me know and we can talk by phone. Also,
the dll is so important to our project as it provides IAccessible2-support
to all of ACTF. It would be a serious setback if users nheeded to build or
download from elsewhere this library simply due to an idl, which, as you
know, has no progrmmatic logic; it is simply a definition file.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
----- Forwarded by Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM on 02/21/2008 09:39 AM
-----
"Barb Cochrane"
<barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
02/21/2008 09:13 AM Michael A
Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMU
S
cc
Subject
RE: RE: Re: Fw:
IAccessible2 & LGPL
Hi Mike,
Dredge away! No worries ;-) ….that’s what we’re here for.
Please review my Comment #3 in CQ1916. I pointed you towards our third
party dependencies guidelines at this URL:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf.
.
Please review the entire document; it’s only a page and a half - - just
long enough for you to finish your coffee! J
As the guideline document suggests, you should discuss this dependency with
Bjorn if you haven’t already done so. He will determine whether it’s a
“works with” or a “pre-req” and whether it would fall into “exempt” or
“non-exempt”. The follow-on steps are quite clear thereafter, depending
upon Bjorn’s determination.
I hope this helps, Mike.
Cheers,
Barb
From: Michael A Squillace [mailto:masquill@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:55 AM
To: Barb Cochrane
Subject: RE: RE: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Barb::
I hate to drudge this issue up again, but I'm getting pressure from
colleagues on a particular issue. The CQ 1916 was rejected and that
concerned committing the actual idl file for the IAccessible2 API along
with generated .c and .h files to the Eclipse repository.
However, the idl file is used to build one of the dlls shipped with ACTF's
accservice component. Bjorn, in a response to shipping a separate library,
IAccessibleProxy.dll, which is basically a dynamic wrapper for this idl,
claimed that this dll had exempt-prereq status. Do we need to start this
process afresh given the fact that our own dll is built using the idl?
Notice that the idl is not shipped; it is simply used by the compiler and
linker to build our dll. If you want to talk by phone, pls let me know.
Pulling this dll would significantly impact functionality of one of our
tools.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
Michael A
Squillace/Austin/IBM
To
12/12/2007 11:01 AM "Barb Cochrane"
<barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
RE: RE: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 &
LGPLLink
Barb:
I think I finally have it straight myself.
The IDL in question is pieced together and based on IDLs from the UNO API
by Sun Microsystems, which is why there are Sun copyright notices in that
file. There are three other files that are generated from that idl file,
which I was going to bundle in an attachment along with the idl in the new
CQ. However, when I entered the new CQ, I had the problem I had before -
hit submit and no response. I searched for the new CQ in IPzilla but it was
not found. I will wait to hear from you to see if it made it through. Once
it does, I'll form the attachment.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
"Barb Cochrane"
<barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
12/11/2007 12:40 PM Michael A
Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Subject
RE: *IBM Confidential: RE: Re:
Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
K – I was writing a reply on the bug but I’ll write it here instead….
a) thanks for following the process below…it’s the one we’ll have to
use. In the meantime
b) the attachment you provided has IBM / Sun copyright notices, so
I’m not sure whether this is the original IDL file, or the output generated
by it. Can you help me understand? Please feel free to call if you think
that’d be faster.
I will probably have one or two follow on questions……thanks.
Cheers!
Barb
From:! Michael A Squillace [mailto:masquill@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 1:35 PM
To: Barb Cochrane
Subject: *IBM Confidential: RE: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Well, just created the attachment with the idl file to 1866 bc I just got
in myself but will work on the process outlined below.
Thanks,
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
"Barb Cochrane"
<barb.cochrane@ec
lipse.org>
12/11/2007 12:31
PM To
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "'Kentarou
Fukuda'" <KENTAROU@xxxxxxxxxx>
cc
"'Chieko Asakawa'" <CHIE@xxxxxxxxxx>, Joseph A
Latone/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS, Mike
Strack/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "'Sharon Corbett'"
<sharon.corbett@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
RE: *IBM Confidential: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Hi Mike,
I was able to get into 1866, and could not find a file with an *.idl
extension, nor did the search return any files containing GNU or LGPL.
That's okay though....because CQ1866 is an EPL contribution and the IDL is
non-EPL, the IDL file will need to be entered as a new, separate CQ in any
event.
If any of the EPL code in CQ1866 has been generated using the LGPL IDL,
then
please mark the new non-EPL CQ for the IDL as "blocking" CQ1866, and please
also let us know of any other CQs wherein the non-EPL code was generated
using that LGPL'd IDL.
Please don't read anything into the term "blocking"....it's not intended to
imply any sort of foregone conclusion on an approval (or not), rather it's
used to highlight the relationship between the two CQs.
We will have to review the submission before we can give you a response to
your original question below.
I hope this helps.
Thanks.
Barb
-----Original Message-----
From: Barb Cochrane [mailto:barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 11:21 AM
To: 'Barb Cochrane'; 'Michael A Squillace'; 'Kentarou Fukuda'
Cc: 'Chieko Asakawa'; 'Joseph A Latone'; 'Mike Strack'
Subject: RE: *IBM Confidential: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
I take that back. I was looking at 1886 in error.
Database problems are preventing me from looking at 1866. I'll let you
know
once I get access.
Thanks.
Barb
_____
From: Barb Cochrane [mailto:barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 11:17 AM
To: 'Michael A Squillace'; 'Kentarou Fukuda'
Cc: 'Chieko Asakawa'; 'Joseph A Latone'; 'Mike Strack'
Subject: RE: *IBM Confidential: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see an LGPL file in CQ 1866....?
There are two .xsd files there, but no LGPL. If you would like to attach
it, I'll have a look.
Thanks.
Barb
_____
From: Michael A Squillace [mailto:masquill@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 10:56 AM
To: Kentarou Fukuda; barb.cochrane@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Chieko Asakawa; Joseph A Latone; Mike Strack
Subject: *IBM Confidential: Re: Fw: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Barb and team:
Can we commit this file to our CVS repository? There seems to be some
confusion about it.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able,
Kentarou Fukuda/Japan/IBM@IBMJP
12/11/2007 09:50 AM
To
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Chieko Asakawa/Japan/IBM@IBMJP, Mike Strack/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Joseph A
Latone/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
Re: Fw: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPLLink
<
Notes://D01ML605/85256B2F005958F3/38D46BF5E8F08834852564B500129B2C/1F29A640
579604C3852573AE0054920C>
Hi Mike,
I also got a mail from Joe about this.
As in your mail, we don't have to consider the compiler-generated stub
files
as LGPL. That's very good news.
But, the IDL file itself is LGPL. So, we can't commit it to Eclipse without
OSSC.
Is it correct? > Joe?
In the CQ 1866, I thought the IDL file was not included in the initial zip
file.
And, when you attached new zip file, these new files were not referred to
as
newly added files.
Thus, Eclipse IP team did not scan new attached file. So, they might not be
check the IDL file.
Best regards,
---
Kentarou Fukuda, Ph.D.
Tokyo Research Laboratory, IBM Japan
Tel: +81-46-215-4659
E-mail: kentarou@xxxxxxxxxx
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
2007/12/12 00:25
To
Kentarou Fukuda/Japan/IBM@IBMJP, Chieko Asakawa/Japan/IBM@IBMJP, Mike
Strack/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Subject
Fw: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Since other companies are using the IDL publically and without legal issue,
I think its safe to commit to the repository. This IDL was in the original
CQ I submitted for AccProbe (CQ 1866) and, if Eclipse IP has a problem, I'm
sure they will let us know.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
----- Forwarded by Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM on 12/11/2007 09:22 AM
-----
Pete Brunet/Austin/IBM
12/10/2007 08:45 PM
To
Joseph A Latone/Cambridge/IBM
cc
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Richard
Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
Re: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPLLink
<
Notes://D01ML605/85256B2F005958F3/38D46BF5E8F08834852564B500129B2C/E971BB07
4836CA23862573AD0071133E>
Joe, This is something you will have to take up with your legal staff.
My thought, which of course doesn't carry any legal weight, is that the IDL
defines an interface and does not specify any programmable logic.
Software,
unrelated to the IDL, such as the Microsoft MIDL compiler, can generate
executable code from the API definition so I would think that any legal
review would be focused on the MIDL compiler rather than the IDL. I'm not
aware of any licensing issues with the MIDL compiler output so I would be
surprised if there would be any issues. I your legal team determines that
there are issues please let me know.
BTW, there are several products which using the IDL and apparently are not
concerned, i.e. Mozilla Firefox 3, IBM Lotus Workplace and Symphony,
Freedom
Scientific JAWS, and GW Micro Window-Eyes.
Pete Brunet
IBM Accessibility Architecture and Development
11501 Burnet Road, MS 9022E004, Austin, TX 78758
Voice: (512) 838-4594, Cell: (512) 689-4155
Ionosphere: WS4G
George Kraft/Austin/IBM
12/10/2007 02:38 PM
To
Joseph A Latone/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS, Pete
Brunet/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
Re: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPLLink
<
Notes://D03NM116/8525604600452FB8/BD053B46B119C67A8525643000742B16/AC61E5DE
6232264C882573AD006FCFED>
I think my earlier reply was for you to contact Pete Brunet, because he is
IBM's and the Linux Foundation's IAccessible2 team leader. I no longer
work for SWG and I don't feel comfortable representing them for this
question.
Best regards,
George Kraft IV, P.E.
gk4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
IBM Linux Technology Center
Our "dedication to every client's success" includes GNU/Linux.
Joseph A Latone/Cambridge/IBM
12/10/2007 02:23 PM
To
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
George Kraft/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
Re: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPLLink
<
Notes://D03MC018/862562450071DFEB/38D46BF5E8F08834852564B500129B2C/2B9EA900
09D8C19A852573AD00686A34>
I never received an answer, Mike...
Joe Latone
IBM Watson Research Center
jlatone@xxxxxxxxxx
(h) +1 415-373-4900
(c) +1 415-299-7068
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM
12/10/2007 11:01 AM
To
Joseph A Latone/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS
cc
George Kraft/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
Re: *IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPLLink
<
Notes://D01ML605/85256CA4001851D1/38D46BF5E8F08834852564B500129B2C/FDF43C59
DE8B1237882573A4006394B7>
Did we ever get an answer to this? We are running into the same questions
bc
we need to release stubs to Eclipse.
--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX
W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066
masquill@xxxxxxxxxx
www.ibm.com/able
Joseph A Latone/Cambridge/IBM
12/01/2007 01:28 PM
To
George Kraft/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Michael A Squillace/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
*IBM Confidential: IAccessible2 & LGPL
Hi Steve and George (and I cc's Mike Squillace because I saw his name a few
times in the IA2 archives)
Would you be able to offer me a bit of clarity on the following question,
related to the IAccessible2 IDL interface, the LGPL, and your 2006
proposal
(copy/pasted below my signature or from this link, Link
<Notes://D25DB01/852567AC00508771/54485A7B2185860A882571AC0000E3EA> ).
The question is, what is the license of the IAccessible2 stub files (to be
used by the client-side of the interface, not the server-side
implementation
of the interface) generated from the IAccessible2 IDL?
Slide 1 from your proposal below states:
We are requesting an addendum to produce LGPL licensed Interface
Definition Document (IDL) documents.
Specifically:
LGPL license the proposed IDL documents describing our iAccessible2
specification for Windows.
NOTE: commercial products can use LGPL header files built from the proposed
IDL documents without contamination
Does that mean the license of the stub files is "LGPL with exception" or do
the stub files simply fall under the ownership of the one that generated
the
stub files and wants to use them in their client? After all, strictly
speaking, if the client-side stub files are LGPL, they'd potentially
contaminate the client application, and I'm sure that's not the intent,
though I don't see where this is explicitly stated publicly.
I have an OSS proposal that wants to use only the client-side stub files,
and I don't think this should have to go through the paperwork of an OSS
proposal for no reason. But, I also need to know how they're licensed,
because the proper license header should appear along with them.
Thanks, Joe
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Comment to: Link
<
Notes://D25DB01/852567AC00508771/E926F35697DF0E9F8525650E007594FB/17A2733FB
95C6D0085256FD30065CE44> MINUTES
OK to proceed - FSGA documentation - LGPL IDL docs
created by: Steve Gerdt on 14-Jul-06
Steve Gerdt/San Jose/IBM
07/14/2006 05:03 PM
To
George Kraft/Austin/IBM
cc
Catherine Laws/Austin/IBM, Pete Brunet/Austin/IBM, Justin
Dillon/Austin/IBM,
Herb Hintze/Austin/IBM
Subject
FSGA docs - LGPL IDL
George-
You are OK to proceed with your plan of adding the scope of LGPL docs to
your previously-approved OSSC proposal. Per earlier discussions, no OSSC
re-review is required since the license addition only involves
documentation
(not code). Per your addendum, local legal and Neil Abrams have approved
the
documentation addition.
[attachment "ossc-fsga-20060711.ppt" deleted by Joseph A
Latone/Cambridge/IBM]
I have recorded the addendum in our OSSC teamroom.
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Regards,
Steve
Steve Gerdt
Open Source Program Director
IBM Software Group - San Jose, CA
phone: 408-256-0497 t/l 276-0497
email: gerdt@xxxxxxxxxx
IBM CONFIDENTIAL
Joe Latone
IBM Watson Research Center
jlatone@xxxxxxxxxx
(h) +1 415-373-4900
(c) +1 415-299-7068
