Ted & John,
Should Taverna wait until the ECCN registration has been filed (or not) before we prepare our next release candidate for voting? On 9 May 2016 at 17:54, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote: > We documented it in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAVERNA-959 > and on > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TAVERNADEV/Taverna+Cryptography+review > > See also > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-250?focusedCommentId=15272500&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15272500 > > >> Taverna Language (while primarily an API for designing workflows) includes a >> component which functionality is data storage in a ZIP file - the encryption >> functionality of HTTP Components is however not used, and so Language should >> not be registered. (unless we make a binary distribution that includes HTTP >> Components) > >> Taverna OSGi's Download API module is "Sending, receiving or storing >> information" and so should be registered because it is using HTTP Components >> and can do https. > >> Taverna Engine's Credential Manager module is doing "information security" >> and should be registered. > >> Taverna Common Activities are "Sending, receiving or storing information" >> (talking to web services) and should be registered. > >> Taverna Command Line is primarily running a workflow, and should NOT be >> registered (unless you consider a workflow to be primarily sending/receiving >> information) - however if we make a binary distribution it would include >> Bouncy Castle, Derby, HTTPComponents as JARs, and at that point needs to be >> registered. > > > The README notes show the findings in detail. See the individual repos. > > > We have not done a detailed review on the workbench* modules as we are > not yet releasing them - however our release of the above is currently > blocked on this ECCN registration. > > > On 5 May 2016 at 02:23, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> My guess is that this would fall to me. >> >> There is considerable analysis to be done to determine whether filing is >> required. >> >> Are you guys documenting the decision points? >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2 May 2016 at 03:23, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> > Formally - would it need to be the Incubator PMC chair sending the >>> > ECCN encryption email? >>> >>> Could anyone from IPMC (e.g. our mentors) do it, or just Ted Dunning? >>> >>> -- >>> Stian Soiland-Reyes >>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) >>> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >>> > > > > -- > Stian Soiland-Reyes > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 -- Stian Soiland-Reyes Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
