Re: RFP: jrockit -- A virtual machine for Java
-----Original Message-----
From: Dalibor Topic <robilad@kaffe.org>
To: Johan Walles <walles@mailblocks.com>
Cc: debian-java@lists.debian.org
Sent: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:13:03 +0200
Subject: Re: RFP: jrockit -- A virtual machine for Java
Johan Walles wrote:
"2 (iii) Distributor may modify the Software in accordance with the
Documentation solely to allow for interoperability with Distributor’s
internal MIS systems."
seems to prohibit distribution of packages. In practice, packaging
3rd part software not written for Debian usually means making a tweak
or two to the software to get it to fit into the distribution. The word
'internal' seems to indicate that such modifications may not be
distributed to others. On a side note, what is MIS?
From everything2.com:
"
This represents "Management Information System." This is generally a
system based on a mainframe or minicomputer. Some companies have a
department labeled "MIS" that may serve various puposes in the company,
generally networking related.
"
Debian's apt infrastructure would probably qualify, which would solve
the problems of packaging and derivative works.
"Distributor may not disclose the results of any performance
benchmarks to any third party without BEA’s prior written consent."
This would speak against using it in buildds to build java packages.
The buildd results and timings are public.
I thought the buildds didn't build stuff in non-free? And even if they
did, the "build" process for JRockit would only consist of taking a
JRockit tar file distributed by BEA and shuffle the files into a Debian
package. Thus, the build times wouldn't contain any benchmarking of
the JVM.
[The re-distribution license agreement] requires users to agree to an
'End User Agreement' that's not part of the license document. That's
got a few weird clauses of its own,like
' If the version of JRockit you are licensing under this Agreement is
a “ pre-final,” “beta,” “technology preview,” or similar pre-production
release (collectively, “Pre-final Versions”), as a condition to this
license you agree to discontinue your use of the Pre-final Version and
replace each copy of such Pre-Final Version with the successor general
availability release as soon as it becomes available from BEA.' which
is impossible to satify as BEA does not provide debian packages.
I don't follow you. Why would this clause require BEA ship Debian
packages?
"Confidential Information shall be limited to the Software, the terms
and pricing under this Agreement, and all information clearly
identified as confidential."
So the license agreement is confidential? Are you sure that you're
allowed to post it to debian-java? That would explain why there is no
URL to it ...
I asked to get a copy of it for the specific purpose of having it
disected. But I agree the clause sounds silly, I'll ask about it.
"5.4 Distributor Indemnity. Distributor agrees to indemnify, defend
and hold BEA harmless from and against any costs, losses, liabilities,
claims or expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising out
of representations or warranties made by Distributor or its agents in
the distribution of any Value Added Solution. For any claim arising
hereunder, BEA agrees (a) to reasonably cooperate with Distributor, (b)
to notify Distributor promptly in writing of the claim, and (c) that
Distributor shall have sole control of the defense and all related
settlement negotiations."
I'd doubt that Debian would like to indemnify BEA any more than they
would like to indemnify Sun. :) That's always been one of the
showstopper clauses with Sun's JRE, no real difference here, afaict.
I'd doubt that Debian would make any "representations or warranties
[...] in the distribution". So unless Debian promises the world to
users of the JRockit .deb, this point is a no-op for Debian.
//Johan
----------------------------------------------
Mailblocks - A Better Way to Do Email
http://about.mailblocks.com/info
Reply to: