Chiradeep, Whats the progress on this?
Cheers, Hugo On 22 jan. 2014, at 23:35, Chiradeep Vittal <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > Reached out to @strikesme and @danwendlandt > > On 1/21/14 10:14 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <htrippa...@schubergphilis.com> > wrote: > >> We are now again at the exact same point as where Darren was. >> >> This is the legal ticket relevant to the license discussion: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/LEGAL-180 >> >> Either we get an ok from legal or we need to find an alternative. Kelven, >> Chiradeep, are you guys going to chase this ticket? >> >> Hugo >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 07:04, "Hugo Trippaers" <trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Kelven, Chiradeep, >>> >>> What license governs the redistribution, what do we include in our >>> notice file and is that license compatible with the ASF license policy? >>> >>> Hugo >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On 22 jan. 2014, at 00:44, Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Q. Can I redistribute the VI SDK libraries and sample code? >>>> A. You can redistribute only those parts of the SDK package that have >>>> been >>>> designated as ³distributable code². >>>> In VI SDK 2.5, the following components can be redistributed: vim.jar, >>>> vim25.jar. To note developers typically generate web service stubs from >>>> the WSDL file that is included in the VI SDK using a SOAP toolkit. >>>> >>>>>> The stubs source and the compiled stubs can also be distributed. >>>> >>>> >>>> Could this solve our license problem, we discussed before that >>>> generating >>>> our own java stub can give us flexibility to support co-existence of >>>> different versions of VMware web service API inside CloudStack. >>>> >>>> If we see this as urgency, we need to have someone work on to put WSDL >>>> generation process to maven build >>>> >>>> For latest names of VI SDK libraries that can be redistributed visit >>>> http://vmware.com/go/sdk-redistribution-info >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/14, 3:18 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Apparently we can >>>>> https://communities.vmware.com/docs/DOC-7983 >>>>> http://markmail.org/thread/ttamcfb4d6azzbw7 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:46 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Chiradeep, >>>>>> >>>>>> Even on the generated sources nobody seems willing to state that it >>>>>> is ok >>>>>> to include them at the moment. Otherwise I would have put them in >>>>>> already. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hugo >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 21 jan. 2014, at 19:32, Chiradeep Vittal >>>>>>> <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Suboptimal for? >>>>>>> Wouldn't the ACS user want the best / supported client libraries? >>>>>>> Alternatively, can't we just compile the WSDL and check in the >>>>>>> generated >>>>>>> sources? Not check-in the WSDL, but the client sources. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 7:18 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Chip Childers >>>>>>>> <chipchild...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I bet we never got an answer. Frankly, I'd like to see us use >>>>>>>>> something where the licensing is clear. That, or we don't include >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> WSDL in our repo / distro. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Additionally, we are an open source project that is in the >>>>>>>> business of >>>>>>>> producing open source software. Depending on non-free and >>>>>>>> non-opensource libraries is suboptimal, but its worse when there >>>>>>>> is a >>>>>>>> open source alternative. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --David >>>> >
