add BIRT branch to trunk.

[hans_bakker]

We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.

The branch:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt

which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
implemented all comments that were received up to now.

It is implemented as secondary application.

please let us know about further comments. If no major objections are
received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.

Regards,

Chatree and Hans.

--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates

[Scott Gray-2]

Hi Chatree and Hans,

What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?

Thanks
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:

> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>
> The branch:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>
> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>
> It is implemented as secondary application.
>
> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections are
> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chatree and Hans.
>
> --
> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>

[Adam Heath-2]

Hans Bakker wrote:

> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>
> The branch:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>
> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>
> It is implemented as secondary application.
>
> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections are
> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.

Still some duplicate libs.

lib/plugins/com.ibm.icu_4.0.1.v20090822.jar

The batik jars.

commons-codec, xerces.

And this is VERY bad.  You list *ALL* jars in framework/birt as being
under EPL.  WRONG.  ERROR.  DO NOT PASS GO.

As I initial said a long time ago, this should have not ever been
checked into ofbiz, not even as a branch, until the licensing
requirements were dealt with.  This is very bad.

So, to summarize, you still have a bit of work to do.

[Scott Gray-2]

I checked out the branch and had a look, I see a large number of  
javascript and jsp source files that are EPL licensed and I'm pretty  
sure that we cannot include them.

Additionally and this one is a little more obscure and I could quite  
possibly be wrong but the dteapi.jar file contains a javax.olap  
package and the only reference I can find to that package is jsr-69 (http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=069 
).  According to that page the jsr never reached Final Release and the  
Proposed Final Draft was licensed under an evaluation license.  Birt  
has written the source code for the interfaces defined by the  
specification themselves and licensed it as EPL but I have know idea  
whether they were legally allowed to do that.

Regards
Scott

On 20/11/2009, at 12:36 PM, Scott Gray wrote:

> Hi Chatree and Hans,
>
> What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?
>
> Thanks
> Scott
>
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>>
>> The branch:
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>>
>> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
>> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>>
>> It is implemented as secondary application.
>>
>> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections are
>> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chatree and Hans.
>>
>> --
>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>
>

[Scott Gray-2]

One more thing, BirtViewerAttributeBean.java appears to have sourced  
most of it's code from birt's ViewAttributeBean class and then just  
been licensed as ASL which I don't think is appropriate, it's really a  
derivative work.

The same applies to BirtEngineServlet.java and BirtViewerServlet.java,  
except for minor changes they are exact copies of birt files with the  
license changed.

Regards
Scott

On 20/11/2009, at 3:55 PM, Scott Gray wrote:

> I checked out the branch and had a look, I see a large number of  
> javascript and jsp source files that are EPL licensed and I'm pretty  
> sure that we cannot include them.
>
> Additionally and this one is a little more obscure and I could quite  
> possibly be wrong but the dteapi.jar file contains a javax.olap  
> package and the only reference I can find to that package is jsr-69 (http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=069 
> ).  According to that page the jsr never reached Final Release and  
> the Proposed Final Draft was licensed under an evaluation license.  
> Birt has written the source code for the interfaces defined by the  
> specification themselves and licensed it as EPL but I have know idea  
> whether they were legally allowed to do that.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 20/11/2009, at 12:36 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> Hi Chatree and Hans,
>>
>> What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>
>>> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>>>
>>> The branch:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>>>
>>> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
>>> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>>>
>>> It is implemented as secondary application.
>>>
>>> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections  
>>> are
>>> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Chatree and Hans.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>
>>
>

[David E. Jones-2]

According to the licensing guidelines page these should be fine as  
long as they are NOT and NEVER modified. In other words, there is an  
exception for certain files (especially javascript, and jsp should be  
okay too) where we can include the source if it is unmodified, since  
that is the only way they can operate (ie they can't be compiled and  
included in compiled form).

-David


On Nov 19, 2009, at 7:55 PM, Scott Gray wrote:

> I checked out the branch and had a look, I see a large number of  
> javascript and jsp source files that are EPL licensed and I'm pretty  
> sure that we cannot include them.
>
> Additionally and this one is a little more obscure and I could quite  
> possibly be wrong but the dteapi.jar file contains a javax.olap  
> package and the only reference I can find to that package is jsr-69 (http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=069 
> ).  According to that page the jsr never reached Final Release and  
> the Proposed Final Draft was licensed under an evaluation license.  
> Birt has written the source code for the interfaces defined by the  
> specification themselves and licensed it as EPL but I have know idea  
> whether they were legally allowed to do that.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 20/11/2009, at 12:36 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> Hi Chatree and Hans,
>>
>> What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>
>>> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>>>
>>> The branch:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>>>
>>> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
>>> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>>>
>>> It is implemented as secondary application.
>>>
>>> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections  
>>> are
>>> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Chatree and Hans.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>
>>
>

[David E. Jones-2]

These are more of a problem. We can't include any derived source for  
the EPL license, since that is where the viral/copy-left part of the  
license applies.

These need to be in their original form as compiled classes, or need  
to be a "clean-room" implementation that is not covered by the  
copyright on the original files.

-David


On Nov 19, 2009, at 9:21 PM, Scott Gray wrote:

> One more thing, BirtViewerAttributeBean.java appears to have sourced  
> most of it's code from birt's ViewAttributeBean class and then just  
> been licensed as ASL which I don't think is appropriate, it's really  
> a derivative work.
>
> The same applies to BirtEngineServlet.java and  
> BirtViewerServlet.java, except for minor changes they are exact  
> copies of birt files with the license changed.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 20/11/2009, at 3:55 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> I checked out the branch and had a look, I see a large number of  
>> javascript and jsp source files that are EPL licensed and I'm  
>> pretty sure that we cannot include them.
>>
>> Additionally and this one is a little more obscure and I could  
>> quite possibly be wrong but the dteapi.jar file contains a  
>> javax.olap package and the only reference I can find to that  
>> package is jsr-69 (http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=069).  According  
>> to that page the jsr never reached Final Release and the Proposed  
>> Final Draft was licensed under an evaluation license.  Birt has  
>> written the source code for the interfaces defined by the  
>> specification themselves and licensed it as EPL but I have know  
>> idea whether they were legally allowed to do that.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:36 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chatree and Hans,
>>>
>>> What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>
>>>> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>>>>
>>>> The branch:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>>>>
>>>> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
>>>> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>>>>
>>>> It is implemented as secondary application.
>>>>
>>>> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections  
>>>> are
>>>> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Chatree and Hans.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Scott Gray-2]

Your interpretation sounds a little more liberal than what I'm reading  
here:
"For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF  
product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is  
unmodified and unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being  
specified by a standard), inclusion of appropriately labeled source is  
also permitted. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd,  
whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces  
specification."
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b

I don't think an entire javascript library (30+ files) could be  
considered a "small amount of source" even if it is unlikely to be  
changed in anyway.

I'll have a look around the other ASF projects to see if anyone is  
doing something similar but I think it might be wise for us to ask  
legal.

Regards
Scott

On 20/11/2009, at 7:38 PM, David E Jones wrote:

>
> According to the licensing guidelines page these should be fine as  
> long as they are NOT and NEVER modified. In other words, there is an  
> exception for certain files (especially javascript, and jsp should  
> be okay too) where we can include the source if it is unmodified,  
> since that is the only way they can operate (ie they can't be  
> compiled and included in compiled form).
>
> -David
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2009, at 7:55 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> I checked out the branch and had a look, I see a large number of  
>> javascript and jsp source files that are EPL licensed and I'm  
>> pretty sure that we cannot include them.
>>
>> Additionally and this one is a little more obscure and I could  
>> quite possibly be wrong but the dteapi.jar file contains a  
>> javax.olap package and the only reference I can find to that  
>> package is jsr-69 (http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=069).  According  
>> to that page the jsr never reached Final Release and the Proposed  
>> Final Draft was licensed under an evaluation license.  Birt has  
>> written the source code for the interfaces defined by the  
>> specification themselves and licensed it as EPL but I have know  
>> idea whether they were legally allowed to do that.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:36 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chatree and Hans,
>>>
>>> What was the outcome of the EPL licensed source files?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 20/11/2009, at 12:31 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>
>>>> We are now ready to add the BIRT branch to the trunk.
>>>>
>>>> The branch:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/branches/addbirt
>>>>
>>>> which contains a full ofbiz from 3 weeks ago with birt added and
>>>> implemented all comments that were received up to now.
>>>>
>>>> It is implemented as secondary application.
>>>>
>>>> please let us know about further comments. If no major objections  
>>>> are
>>>> received we will merge this with the trunk early next week.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Chatree and Hans.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Chatree Srichart]

Hello, Adam Heath

I have a question about solve duplicated jar files. Can I use those jar
files in birt component instead of use in base component and remove from
base component?

[hans_bakker]

In general try to use the ones in the base component. If the version in
birt is later, copy them to the base component and update the license
file

We have to ensure however that existing function still works with this
new version... not sure how we can easily test that....

Regards,
Hans

On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 08:22 -0500, Chatree Srichart wrote:
> Hello, Adam Heath
>
> I have a question about solve duplicated jar files. Can I use those jar
> files in birt component instead of use in base component and remove from
> base component?
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates

[Chatree Srichart]

    All jar files that are plug-in bundle for eclipse OSGI platform need to
have  bundle description in META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file that placed in it and
all plug-in bundle jar files must be placed in
framework/birt/lib/platform/plugins directoroy. So I can not move any jar
files from base component to plugins directory or move any plug-in bundle
jar files that placed in plugins directory to other directory except plugins
directory.

    Each plug-in bundle require dependency bundles that describe in
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF. So I need to place some duplicated jar files that be
plugin-bundle in plugins directory.

    These are problems that I can not solve for OFBiz community.

[Chatree Srichart]

Can OFBiz base on eclipse OSGI platform? It can place all common/base
libraries as eclipse plugin. Eclipse has very variety plug-in bundles and
eclipse OSGI is a perfect framework.

[Jacques Le Roux]

Also if you may need to update the NOTICE file and let us know to update the wiki libraries page (I guess it needs permission)

Jacques

From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]>

> In general try to use the ones in the base component. If the version in
> birt is later, copy them to the base component and update the license
> file
>
> We have to ensure however that existing function still works with this
> new version... not sure how we can easily test that....
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 08:22 -0500, Chatree Srichart wrote:
>> Hello, Adam Heath
>>
>> I have a question about solve duplicated jar files. Can I use those jar
>> files in birt component instead of use in base component and remove from
>> base component?
> --
> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
> Also if you may need to update the NOTICE file and let us know to update the wiki libraries page (I guess it needs permission)

Why a if there ? no ideas :D

Jacques

> Jacques
>
> From: "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]>
>> In general try to use the ones in the base component. If the version in
>> birt is later, copy them to the base component and update the license
>> file
>>
>> We have to ensure however that existing function still works with this
>> new version... not sure how we can easily test that....
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>> On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 08:22 -0500, Chatree Srichart wrote:
>>> Hello, Adam Heath
>>>
>>> I have a question about solve duplicated jar files. Can I use those jar
>>> files in birt component instead of use in base component and remove from
>>> base component?
>> --
>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>

[Adam Heath-2]

Chatree Srichart wrote:

>     All jar files that are plug-in bundle for eclipse OSGI platform need to
> have  bundle description in META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file that placed in it and
> all plug-in bundle jar files must be placed in
> framework/birt/lib/platform/plugins directoroy. So I can not move any jar
> files from base component to plugins directory or move any plug-in bundle
> jar files that placed in plugins directory to other directory except plugins
> directory.
>
>     Each plug-in bundle require dependency bundles that describe in
> META-INF/MANIFEST.MF. So I need to place some duplicated jar files that be
> plugin-bundle in plugins directory.
>
>     These are problems that I can not solve for OFBiz community.

No duplicates. Period.

If eclipse needs more meta-data, then fix ofbiz so that it doesn't
fail when the meta-data is there.  Then place those things global.

More work, yes, but no duplicates.