BPEL licensing - deja vue / resolution

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Folks,

 

My thought of the day is that I have been here

done all this before. Only last time it was Borland

that provided the means to break the impasse.

 

Remember when the legal world was frozen into

thinking that software users had to sign-off on a

twenty page+ licensing agreement?

 

And then Borland came out with its no nosense

approach that printed on to the back of the

envelope the disks came in?

 

We've also all seen this from NDA doc's that

are impossible to sign - but people have

sensible, legible and concise two or three

pagers of those now too.

 

My suggestion is that you take matters into

your own hands at the F2F.  Sit down around

a laptop and edit together a concise licensing

agreement that looks good to you - take all five

mega-doc's - consolidate, delete, and fixup.

 

Then as a group of contributors to the TC you

will have what you think is a fair and reasonable

license to use.  

 

As I see it the bottom line is that either the

original contributors follow through on their

intent on bringing BPEL into OASIS, and

benefiting from all the hard work the TC is doing

on making the specifications workable, or

it ends here as a specification only they can use.

 

Hope you have a productive time in Florida.

 

DW