Re: [ee4j-pmc] licensing questions for Jakarta TCKs

["Kevin Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>]

As always, good questions,
Ed!

Although each
Specification project has a declared license (EPL, Apache, etc), I thought
it was okay to use multiple licenses as long as they are in separate repositories
(and the licenses are approved by Eclipse Foundation, of course).  And,
I believe the re-licensing of material from one license to another is not
a simple process.  So, my take is that as these TCKs are broken out
from the Platform TCK, then these component TCKs should stay with the EPL
license.  That would be the easiest approach.

If we go this
route, then there would be no need for a dual license approach.  For
these special cases, the Specification and API may be under Apache, while
the TCK is under EPL.  I suppose this would depend on the individual
projects and how much work they want to perform to either re-license or
dual license the material.

We also have the
official TCK license (https://www.eclipse.org/legal/tck.php),
but I'm assuming you are not concerned with this at the moment since that
is used for binary distribution of the TCK (not the source). 

---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter 
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter

Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)



From:
       "Ed
Bratt" <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
       "ee4j-pmc
PMC List" <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
       08/03/2021
17:10
Subject:
       [EXTERNAL]
[ee4j-pmc] licensing questions for Jakarta TCKs
Sent
by:        "ee4j-pmc"
<ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>

---

I've been thinking about how we are
going to move forward with the 
Jakarta TCKs. I've bumped into a couple of license related questions. 
 From what I understand, it seems that the PMC might be a good place to
start seeking clarity about those questions. I know what I think the 
answer might be, but I wanted to check with the PMC to be sure:

1. Should nightly TCK builds be released under the specification project
license? (I think many TCKs are currently released under EPL, regardless
of what their project license is.)

2. If we move TCK code from the Platform TCK project (where the project
license is EPL + GPL), to a project with a different license -- should
we change the license for the code and the nightly TCK builds?

These next questions relate to a proposed migration for TCK releases 
available via Maven Central. We have determined that dual license 
released artifacts satisfy Sonatype's Open Source license requirements.
As the TCK builds are migrated to Mvn, the requirement that TCK kits be
made available through a Maven repository will become just that -- a 
requirement.

A) Do the project teams prepare the dual license text files, or do those
need to come from an Eclipse entity?

B) Are dual-licensed TCKs allowed, from the normative download under 
jakarta.ee/specifications? (i.e. linked to the Specification pages and
promoted by a member of the Spec. committee into 
https://download.eclipse.org/jakartaee/*)

Ideally, I believe we'd like to produce nightly kits licensed under the
Project license (i.e. without the TCK license), and only produce one kit
with the TCK license once it's been determined ready for promotion. Dual
license (I think that would be the project license and the TCK license),
would be easiest from a production stand-point -- This would also allow
us to accept certification requests from Maven Central TCKs OR from the
Specification downloads since they'd both have the same SHA-256 sum.

I think, under no circumstances would we endorse that the TCKs only be
available at Maven Central (or some suitable 3rd party repository) -- 
but if that's also a possible question. In other words, something like:
a normative TCK MUST be available from the Specifications download 
repository. In addition, that artifact may be made available from Maven
Central. Certification requests must include the location from which 
their TCK was obtained.

Please advise or help me know where I should pursue these questions further.

Thanks

-- Ed

_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc