RE: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assistproj

[James Moody <James_Moody@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sounds great. As a further clarification,
is the license mentioned below a "special offer" to aid in this
project, or can others download jBPM BPEL under this license today?

I'll forward any info from IP to the
list.

Thanks,

james

bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 05/11/2006 01:08:58
AM:

> James,
>  
> Let me take that question off Mark. The proposal
consists of making 
> jBPM BPEL available to aid in the construction of the runtime 
> framework. The JBoss community would remain committed to improving
> the BPEL runtime product and hosting it in the JBoss public repository.
>  
> It looks like this proposal is consistent with
the project goals. 
> Please let us know when you have more details on the IP stuff.
>  
> -Alejandro
>  
> 
> From: bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of James Moody
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:58 PM
> To: BPEL Designer project developer discussions.
> Subject: Re: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation
> to assistproject development
>  
> 
> Hi again Mark, 
> 
> Yes, I've contacted an Eclipse IP person, I think they'll probably
> have some questions, which I will relay to you if I can't answer them.
> 
> Re-reading your donation proposal, I just wanted to clarify one 
> aspect. Did you envision this jBPM-BPEL code "living" on
Eclipse.
> org? I.e. developed henceforth in our CVS repository? Or simply 
> available under a friendly license to aid in the development of our
> runtime framework and reference glue code? If the former, that might
> be problematic for a couple of reasons, namely that owning a runtime
> is explicitly outside the scope of our project goals, as well as 
> potential license issues (there may be issues with having non-EPL
> code living on Eclipse.org but again I'm not a lawyer). If the 
> latter, fantastic - this is what I had asked the IP guy about and
> hope to have more information soon. 
> 
> james 
> 
> 
> bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 05/09/2006 08:32:19 AM:
> 
> > James, did you ask the "Eclipse IP person/people to take
a look"?
> > 
> > Mark.
> > 
> > 
> > James Moody wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Mark,
> > >
> > > This looks very interesting! >From the jBPM-BPEL roadmap
that you 
> > > outline below, it looks like your dates will line up nicely
with those 
> > > of this project (allowing of course for whatever changes
are necessary 
> > > when WS-BPEL 2.0 is completed).  I believe this move
will certainly 
> > > benefit the community.
> > >
> > > I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment on the license-related
issues, 
> > > except to say that we should get the Eclipse IP person/people
to take 
> > > a look and confim that it makes them happy.
> > >
> > > Bruno: as you've taken a look at the issue of a runtime
framework, I'd 
> > > appreciate it if you could add any comments here.
> > >
> > > Let's continue the discussion here of how to proceed on
the design of 
> > > this framework and how to carve up the work among those
involved.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > james_______________________________________________
> bpel-dev mailing list
> bpel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/bpel-dev