Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] [jakartaee-spec-project-leads] License files in javadoc and sources artifacts

The PDF hasn't included the javadocs for probably 15 years.  I've explained this several times.

The javadocs submitted along with the spec document needs to use the EFSL.

The javadoc jar file can use EPL, that doesn't matter.

It was simpler to just produce one artifact usable for both so we didn't worry about the license in the javadoc jar file, but if someone wants to propose a different way to do it that's fine.

Kevin Sutter wrote on 7/31/19 8:07 AM:
>  I am operating under the assumption that the PDF file produced as the final specification document will include the JavaDoc content.

The generated PDF does not include the Javadoc content.  TBH, I also thought that was the original requirement.  But, as we worked through the skeletal Spec process, it was determined that this was not a requirement.  Maybe that was a wrong conclusion, but that's where we stand.  Definitely a topic for our call today.  Thanks.

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



From:        Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date:        07/31/2019 10:00 AM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] [jakartaee-spec-project-leads] License files in javadoc and sources artifacts
Sent by:        jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




On 2019-07-31 10:30 a.m., Kevin Sutter wrote:
>No, I do not think that the JavaDoc jar file should also be available under the EFSL.

Mike, I'm confused by this statement.  I thought this was a requirement since the combination of the Skeletal Spec plus the JavaDoc constituted the "Specification" for the Jakarta EE 8 components.  If this is truly not required, it simplifies a lot of work.

I am operating under the assumption that the PDF file produced as the final specification document will include the JavaDoc content. That PDF file is the artifact that should be made available under the EFSL, and that is the mechanism by which the APIs are all clearly licensed for use in independent implementations. I don't see why you would ever want to put a jar file under the EFSL.
Of course if my assumption is incorrect then I'm wrong.
I'll join the Spec Committee call today to discuss.
--

Mike Milinkovich

Executive Director | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@mmilinkov

+1.613.220.3223 (m)_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee



_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee


Back to the top