Not all. http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/mo /Alarm.java
On 2/18/14 12:05 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >Option 1 still needs licensing sorted. Being on a maven repo still >doesn't fix the problem for us and our users. > >WRT to vijava the classes in source all appear to have a copyright >header indicating that Steve is the author and licensed under BSD. >In example: >http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim25/A >gentInstallFailed.java > >--David > >On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Chiradeep Vittal ><chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >> I'd say option 1 is the easiest to digest. >> On that note, are we gaining anything (legal-wise) by switching to >>vijava? >> I just uncompressed the download[1]. It bundles the compiled classes >>found >> in vim25.jar which is (presumably) VMWare proprietary. >> >> >> [1] http://vijava.sourceforge.net/ >> >> On 2/18/14 11:10 AM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >> >>>#1 would still need licensing sorted - explicitly it would need to be >>>a Cat A or Cat B license. >>>https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html >>> >>>#2 or similar would work I think (though I'd imagine they'd choose >>>MIT or BSD if going that route) >>> >>>#3 A statement that they don't consider the WSDL copyrightable (I >>>can't imagine they'd go for that, but who knows, makes sense >>>technically and Feist v Rural seems to suggest that 'information' or >>>even 'collection of information' isn't copyrightable without an >>>element of creativity. WSDL by it's nature is a description; and the >>>phonebook analogy plays well there. >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural >>> >>>--David >>> >>> >>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal >>><chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> I just pinged the attorney again (there is a live one assigned to this >>>> question on the VMWare side). >>>> >>>> What options will work? If we can provide some concrete options, >>>>perhaps >>>> they will pick >>>> 1. Provide generated SDK jars in maven repo >>>> 2. Explicitly add ASL to WSDL >>>> 3. ? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Chiradeep >>>> >>>> On 2/18/14 7:14 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <h...@trippaers.nl> wrote: >>>> >>>>>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-18 >>>>>>>0 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
