[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] about the status of atinject

Mark,

The patent grant in the ALv2 is far, far weaker than the patent grants in the Jakarta EE Spec Process.


On 2019-05-09 3:49 p.m., Mark Struberg wrote:
Txs Mike!

My personal opinion is that it will work out.
ALv2 has a patent grant. So this area is covered.
Also the IP is fully covered through the license.
Imo the only question left is whether there are any trademarks used in the spec. 
Unlikely but possible. Should be easy to check.

Itâs of course good style amongst gentlemen to ask the original authors for permission to take over maintenance of this spec. But legally this would not even be necessary.

What we should focus on first is whether we want to migrate atinject at all from our side?
Or should we rather leave javax.atinject as is forever?

LieGrue,
Strub


Am 09.05.2019 um 20:40 schrieb Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:


It is true that Oracle did not contribute JSR330. That is not the same thing as saying it will never be part of Jakarta EE. We will be approaching the copyright holders to ask their permission. They might say "no", but until that time I would not automatically assume that it's impossible.

On 2019-05-09 1:31 p.m., Mark Struberg wrote:
Good afternoon!

Had an interesting discussion with David Blevins today. 
It seems that atinject (JSR-330) is not part of the JavaEE donation from Oracle to the Eclipse Foundation.

This is likely correct as Oracle doesn't own any IP in javax.inject - except the name 'java' in javax.
All the rest of the work is owned by the community which drove atinject. That is Bob Lee, Gavin King, Paul Hammant, JÃrgen HÃller maybe. I was loosely involved on the CDI side of the fence, so I roughly remember the people involved but likely misse some. 
Main point: ALL the work (javadocs, code, 'spec') is Apache License v2 licensed. So it is all perfectly fine to be forked.

Why would we like to fork javax.inject?
In the CDI spec we always wanted to further harmonise things. Like bringing the @Nonbinding annotation over to atinject (where it belongs to, also already talked to Spring guys about it). Or enhance the @Scope annotation.

Atinject is a very core spec to JakartaEE. And neither Oracle (they don't touch anything they fully own) nor we (due to 'java' in the packagename) could enhance not a tiny bit in atinject.

So do we also want to move javax.inject to jakarta.inject while we're at it?

So far I'd strongly favour it.

What do others think?

LieGrue,
strub
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list

jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

-- 
Mike Milinkovich
Executive Director | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
@mmilinkov
+1.613.220.3223 (m)
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev


--

Mike Milinkovich

Executive Director | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

@mmilinkov

+1.613.220.3223 (m)