All,
I'd say licensing is not the most important aspect in this case.
What the JCP is often concerned about are IP or patent related aspects.
E.g. "Who contributed what".
Judging from all those projects already on GitHub, I can say, it is very
transparent and tells you about pretty much every bit of code somebody
contributed.
Thus, if you want to ensure, only EG members touch the code, PRs on GitHub
(or with any Git repository) should not be merged directly from
"outsiders". Otherwise the person shows as "contributor".
It may be a bit simpler with the new membership types JSR 364 will
introduce. Whether or not each contributor has to be listed on the JSR page
is up to the Spec Leads, but once a GitHub user signed the simplified new
"Contributor Agreement" he or she should be safe to merge from.
I am not one of the patent or legal folks there either, but take it as my
experience from EC duty all those years;-)
Werner
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Nigel Deakin <nigel.deakin_at_oracle.com>
wrote:
> Ivar,
>
> On 18/03/2016 09:36, Nigel Deakin wrote:
>
>>
>> On 18/03/2016 08:28, Ivar Grimstad wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Are there any implications, such as licensing, involved with creating a
>>> mirror of the JMS API and spec on GitHub?
>>>
>>> I am only thinking of the API code and specification document, not the
>>> RI or TCK.
>>> And only EG members will be given commit rights.
>>>
>>> Ivar
>>>
>>
>> I'd like to acknowledge that I've read your email (and your earlier
>> emails on the same subject). I'll ask about this at
>> a meeting I have on Monday and get back to you next week.
>>
>
> I'm afraid I cannot give advice or answer questions about licensing
> matters.
>
> Nigel
>
>