Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] EFSL in Javadoc?
The javadoc Maven configuration includes a footer in the generated pages that links to the speclicense.html file, which should contain the EFSP license.  For example:

                            <bottom>
<![CDATA[Copyright &#169; 1996-2019,
    <a href="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.oracle.com">"http://www.oracle.com">Oracle</a>
    and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.
    Use is subject to
    <a href="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:{@docRoot}/doc-files/speclicense.html">"{@docRoot}/doc-files/speclicense.html" target="_top">license terms</a>.
]]>
                            </bottom>

Kevin Sutter wrote on 7/10/19 3:04 PM:
Bill,
How does the generated javadoc use a different license than what is in the Java code?


---------------------------------------------------
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:        Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:        Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        07/10/2019 03:52 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] EFSL in Javadoc?



Kevin Sutter wrote on 7/10/19 1:11 PM:
Hi,
On our wiki (https://wiki.eclipse.org/How_to_Prepare_API_Projects_to_Jakarta_EE_8_Release), we indicate that the javadoc should include the EFSL:
But, what about the non-Oracle projects (Batch, BV, CDI)?  These projects are coming in with ASLv2 for their licensing (already approved).  We will leave all of this imported code with ASLv2, correct?
The code should have whatever code license it needs, but the generated javadocs need to use the ESFL license.

And, what about the overall Spec document?  The template contains the EFSL in the front matter.  Should that be replaced for these non-Oracle projects?  Or, does the skeletal Spec document contain the EFSL, while the Javadoc itself has the ASLv2?  A little confusing, but not bad...
The spec document needs the EFSL license as well.  That's the license we're using for the approved specs, independent of the license for the code of any Compatible Implementation.




Back to the top