Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cn4j-alliance] [External] : Jakarta & MicroProfile Positioning Message - Requires a fix on Slide 9
Gracias, Mike. 

I went ahead and adjusted the slide to include your +1. 
If the additions are unclear or modifications are needed, let's tackle it.  
image.png


On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 2:35 AM Michael Redlich <mpredli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kevin and Amelia:

Thanks for the explanation on the differences with the Jakarta EE and MicroProfile patent strategies.

I vote +1 for keeping the bullet and providing a brief explanation.

All the best,

Mike.

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 3:34 PM Amelia Eiras <aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kevin, 

Your follow-up makes this forum exchange increase its value, thank you. 🤗

I forgot about that extra choice.  
+1 on keeping the bullet. I recommend we incorporate into the bullet under the Jakarta side the detailed explanation you have nicely provided about Jakarta having a dual patent choice.  

What do you and others think? 



On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 8:39 AM Kevin Sutter <kwsutter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting observation, Amelia.

You have correctly pointed out that the default patent license for *new* projects is now the same for both Jakarta EE and MicroProfile -- Implementation Patent License.  But...  Individual Spec Projects can request an exception to use Compatible Patent License (just like Jakarta Config recently did).

Due to these exceptions and our history, Jakarta has projects with both patent licenses -- CPL and IPL.  Microprofile currently only uses the IPL.  So, technically, the patent license is still a difference between the two working groups.  Jakarta uses both, MicroProfile only uses one.  Maybe we should just leave the bullet as-is?

-- Kevin

On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:22 PM Will Lyons <will.lyons@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I agree that the Patent License bullet should be deleted for both MicroProfile and Jakarta EE. 

 

+1

 

Will

 

From: Amelia Eiras <aeiras@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, October 15, 2021 at 2:05 PM
To: CN4J Alliance <cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Will Lyons <will.lyons@xxxxxxxxxx>, John Clingan <jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [External] : Jakarta & MicroProfile Positioning Message - Requires a fix on Slide 9

 

Friday MicroProfilers & Jakartees, 

 

Regarding slide 9 of the Jakarta EE and MicroProfile Messaging, under the Organizational section, the Patent license is no longer a difference between the two working groups. 

 

I recommend its deletion.  IMO, there is no need for each committee to vote on this adjustment.  If others wish for the vote to occur, let's do so. CC'd Will and John. 

 

Important Note: MicroProfile will start sharing the message document via its social media channels this month in a continued schedule. It is of most importance that the information in the Positioning document, already available on the MP website under MPWG page > Knowledge, gets updated as soon as possible. 

 

Feliz finde!

 

_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance
_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance


--
Code, Test, Write, Cycle, Run, Drink, Sleep ... Repeat
Lead Java Queue Editor, InfoQ

Laissez Les Bon Temps Rouler
_______________________________________________
cn4j-alliance mailing list
cn4j-alliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cn4j-alliance

Back to the top