Why do we need the WSDL at all? Why can't we check in vim25 sources like the vijava project has done?
On 2/18/14 2:42 PM, "Kelven Yang" <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote: >The reason why it ended up at noredist build is that the binary jars are >copied from VMware SDK, we are not sure about the license implication and >we don’t build it from source. > >In VMware 5.1 SDK, vim25.jar is generated from importing WSDL plus a >fix-up, the fix-up step is performed by a tool named >FixJaxWsWsdlResource. I disassembled the tool and found that it merely >replaces VimService.class resource search path before it compiles WSDL >generated java files. > >So technically, if there is not any license concerns, we can put all these >into our build scripts, but before I go ahead to do that, someone has to >clear the legal concern of following steps > >1) include vim25.wsdl into CloudStack source code distribution >2) Include a fixup tool, not sure we can directly take it from VMware’s >SDK or is it a problem to rewrite it by us from license point of view. >3) Build script to produce a vim25.jar from CloudStack > >Kelven > > > > >On 2/18/14, 2:07 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >wrote: > >>If vim25.jar source is BSD then why are we including it in noredist? >> >>mvn install:install-file -Dfile=vim25_51.jar >>-DgroupId=com.cloud.com.vmware -DartifactId=vmware-vim25 -Dversion=5.1 >> -Dpackaging=jar >> >> >> >>On 2/18/14 1:51 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >> >>>That's still licensed as BSD (the license header is in the file) >>> >>>--David >>> >>>On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Chiradeep Vittal >>><chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> Not all. >>>> >>>>http://sourceforge.net/p/vijava/code/283/tree/trunk/src/com/vmware/vim2 >>>>5 >>>>/ >>>>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/vim >>>>>2 >>>>>5 >>>>>/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/LEGA >>>>>>>>>>>L >>>>>>>>>>>- >>>>>>>>>>>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 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >
