embedlets-developer

[Embedlets-dev] License?

[Andrzej J. T. <an...@ch...>]

OK...I'm hammering out some preliminary interfaces and base classes to get 
us going.

But before I can really make any progress, we need to decide what kind of 
license we want to release this stuff under:

Apache? 
GPL?
LGPL?
Some other?

So that the appropriate header comments will go in each source file, and the 
correct license.txt file will be included.

The Apache license lets anyone do what they want, so long as they include 
the license terms, copyright and acknowledgement to the embedlets.org 
group...so it's pretty flexible.  I'm leaning towards this one.  It would also be 
nice to become an "official" Apache project some time down the road....lots of 
benefits to going that route, and if we use the Apache license terms in the 
beginning this would be easier.

GPL is nice, but it forces all other implementations to be open source as well 
(it's viral in that regard).  LGPL is more for libraries than containers so 
probably doesn't fit well.

One issue is how to attribute the copyright since we don't have a legal entity 
like the Apache Foundation or embedlets.org that can legally own the 
copyright.



Andrzej Jan Taramina
Chaeron Corporation: Enterprise System Solutions
http://www.chaeron.com

[Embedlets-dev] Re: [Mgmt] License?

[Ted K. <tk...@ya...>]

Andrzej,

> But before I can really make any progress, we need to decide 
> what kind of license we want to release this stuff under:
> 
> Apache? 
> GPL?
> LGPL?
> Some other?

Sourceforge requires that a new project select (at least tentatively) an open
source license as part of the registration process.

http://opensource.org/licenses/


I spent a number of hours studying these licenses and the one I liked the most
was the Apache license:

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apachepl.php


However, since only Apache projects can use this license I then looked for the
license that was as close to it as possible and the one I selected was the BSD
license:

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php


We are not locked into the BSD license, though,  and we can change it at any
time.  I figured that we would get around to addressing this issue eventually.



>It would also be nice to become an "official" Apache project 
>some time down the road....lots of benefits to going that 
>route, and if we use the Apache license terms in the beginning 
>this would be easier.
[...]
>One issue is how to attribute the copyright since we don't 
>have a legal entity like the Apache Foundation or embedlets.org 
>that can legally own the copyright.

After Nicola had posted some links to information on the Apache Incubator site
I spent some time studying the rest of the Incubator materials along with the
Apache foundation's overall philosophies and goals.

Now that you have mentioned the possibility of the Embedlets project putting
together a proposal to become part of the Apache foundation I have started to
think about this.

The Apache foundation appears to be primarily focused on server side open
source software development.  However, if the prediction of billions of
embedded systems being attached to the internet in the near future comes true
(which seems likely) then enterprise systems are going to have a need for
technologies that allow them to monitor, control and manage these devices.

Embedlets, and especially the Outpost reference implementation, are being
specifically designed to provide this type of technology.   When viewed from
this perspective it appears that the Embedlets/Outpost project has the
potential of bringing capabilities to the Apache Foundation that it does not
currently have and that would be very complementary to their existing project
base.

As for the benefits of what Apache would provide for the Embedlets/Outpost
project, more direct access to cutting edge back end developers,  increased
visibility and the support of a best-practice open source community are just a
few of these.

The more I think about this idea the more I like it.  A main question I have,
though, is if Apache would be interested in bringing an embedded systems
oriented project into their community?


Ted


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com

Re: [Embedlets-dev] Re: [Mgmt] License?

[Nicola K. B. <nic...@ap...>]

Ted Kosan wrote, On 14/02/2003 0.19:
> Topic tags:[ARCH][JAPL][WIRING][DOCS][MGMT][STRATEGY][NEWBIE]
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Andrzej,
> 
> 
>>But before I can really make any progress, we need to decide 
>>what kind of license we want to release this stuff under:
>>
>>Apache? 
>>GPL?
>>LGPL?
>>Some other?
> 
> 
> Sourceforge requires that a new project select (at least tentatively) an open
> source license as part of the registration process.
> 
> http://opensource.org/licenses/
> 
> 
> I spent a number of hours studying these licenses and the one I liked the most
> was the Apache license:
> 
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apachepl.php
> 
> 
> However, since only Apache projects can use this license

Not really. Simply substitute "Apache" with the name of the copyright 
holder and the name of the project, and it's usable.

example: http://www.krysalis.org/license.html

>  I then looked for the
> license that was as close to it as possible and the one I selected was the BSD
> license:
> 
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
> 
> We are not locked into the BSD license, though,  and we can change it at any
> time.  I figured that we would get around to addressing this issue eventually.
> 
>>It would also be nice to become an "official" Apache project 
>>some time down the road....lots of benefits to going that 
>>route, and if we use the Apache license terms in the beginning 
>>this would be easier.
> 
> [...]
> 
>>One issue is how to attribute the copyright since we don't 
>>have a legal entity like the Apache Foundation or embedlets.org 
>>that can legally own the copyright.
> 
> 
> After Nicola had posted some links to information on the Apache Incubator site
> I spent some time studying the rest of the Incubator materials along with the
> Apache foundation's overall philosophies and goals.
> 
> Now that you have mentioned the possibility of the Embedlets project putting
> together a proposal to become part of the Apache foundation I have started to
> think about this.
> 
> The Apache foundation appears to be primarily focused on server side open
> source software development.  However, if the prediction of billions of
> embedded systems being attached to the internet in the near future comes true
> (which seems likely) then enterprise systems are going to have a need for
> technologies that allow them to monitor, control and manage these devices.
> 
> Embedlets, and especially the Outpost reference implementation, are being
> specifically designed to provide this type of technology.   When viewed from
> this perspective it appears that the Embedlets/Outpost project has the
> potential of bringing capabilities to the Apache Foundation that it does not
> currently have and that would be very complementary to their existing project
> base.
> 
> As for the benefits of what Apache would provide for the Embedlets/Outpost
> project, more direct access to cutting edge back end developers,  increased
> visibility and the support of a best-practice open source community are just a
> few of these.
> 
> The more I think about this idea the more I like it.  A main question I have,
> though, is if Apache would be interested in bringing an embedded systems
> oriented project into their community?

My personal opinion? Yes. It just makes sense.
But you must start first here and start growing. When there will be a 
community working on code and some initial implementations, it can be 
discussed.

There is some level of politics at Apache. So some think that GUI 
projects can come into Apache, some think no, they are not server-side.

Embedlets are more server-side, so it would be easier, but I would 
approach Apache with some working stuff.

If you all want, I can ask informally some people there what they would 
think about it. Let's see what others think.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nic...@ap...
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [Embedlets-dev] License?

[Nicola K. B. <nic...@ap...>]

Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote, On 13/02/2003 18.31:
> Topic tags:[ARCH][JAPL][WIRING][DOCS][MGMT][STRATEGY][NEWBIE]
> _______________________________________________
> 
> OK...I'm hammering out some preliminary interfaces and base classes to get 
> us going.
> 
> But before I can really make any progress, we need to decide what kind of 
> license we want to release this stuff under:
> 
> Apache? 
> GPL?
> LGPL?
> Some other?

I'd like to chime in and post my 2c. I'm an Apache member, but also the 
founder of krysalis.org, that wants to start living soon with its own 
legal identity.

> So that the appropriate header comments will go in each source file, and the 
> correct license.txt file will be included.
> 
> The Apache license lets anyone do what they want, so long as they include 
> the license terms, copyright and acknowledgement to the embedlets.org 
> group...so it's pretty flexible.  I'm leaning towards this one.  

Yes, of course I like the Apache license. "Do what you want but give us 
credit, don't misuse our name, and don't sue us". It's real total 
freedom. It's the best license to make software used by all and become a 
reference.

> It would also be 
> nice to become an "official" Apache project some time down the road....lots of 
> benefits to going that route, and if we use the Apache license terms in the 
> beginning this would be easier.

Definately. Changing a license in case of individual contributors would 
require all to sign for the change. It becomes easily a mess. See 
below... [1]

> GPL is nice, but it forces all other implementations to be open source as well 
> (it's viral in that regard). 

The virality of GPL makes it difficult if not impossible to use for 
systems that want to become industry standards.

> LGPL is more for libraries than containers so 
> probably doesn't fit well.

And it doens't work well with Java. It defines "linking", which in Java 
is not present. At Apache it's not possible to put LGPL stuff in CVS, 
because we think it's as viral as GPL. We have asked clarifications to 
FSF but have not gotten them yet it seems.

> One issue is how to attribute the copyright since we don't have a legal entity 
> like the Apache Foundation or embedlets.org that can legally own the 
> copyright.

[1] From my experience I can say that making a legal entity that has the 
license is the best solution in this case. It makes it easy to change 
the license in the future or give away copyright, as for example would 
happen by donating code to Apache.

I am in the process of doing it for Krysalis for the same reason.

Anyway, I am also part of the Incubator PMC at Apache 
http://incubator.apache.org/ ... so if/when you will apply for Apache 
you will see me there too ;-)

 From what I see this is an excellent group, if you continue like this 
IMHO you will go far. My compliments :-)

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nic...@ap...
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------