/[classpath]/classpath/doc/www.gnu.org/faq/faq.wml
ViewVC logotype

Diff of /classpath/doc/www.gnu.org/faq/faq.wml

Parent Directory Parent Directory | Revision Log Revision Log | View Patch Patch

revision 1.16 by patrik_reali, Mon Mar 14 18:27:32 2005 UTC revision 1.17 by mark, Wed May 11 10:10:24 2005 UTC
# Line 206  href="docs/hacking.html">GNU Line 206  href="docs/hacking.html">GNU
206  Classpath Hacker&#x2019;s Guide</a>, and pick up a <createlink name="task" url="tasks.html"> from the list!  Classpath Hacker&#x2019;s Guide</a>, and pick up a <createlink name="task" url="tasks.html"> from the list!
207  </faq>  </faq>
208    
209  <faq question="Can I look as Sun's sources to get inspiration?">  <faq question="Can I look at source code distributed with other
210  No. In fact, if you read Sun's sources we can't accept any code from you.  implementations to get inspiration?">
211    If you are going to contribute source code to GNU Classpath we must
212    make sure that you have not studied the source code of the JDK/JRE or
213    decompiled any of its classes. Furthermore you must not have signed
214    any non-disclosure agreements with Sun or other companies in regard
215    with java technology that might cover the core class libaries or
216    tools. The reason for this requirement is that we want to make sure
217    that Sun or any other company cannot rightfully claim that GNU
218    Classpath infringes their copyright. You are therefore questioned
219    about your experience with other implementations of similar source
220    code and any agreements with companies you might have signed when you
221    request to contribute to GNU Classpath.
222    <p>
223    Please note that this does not mean you cannot help GNU Classpath at
224    all in such a case. Here is a list of things you can do instead:
225    <ul>
226      <li>write Mauve test cases</li>
227      <li>write example applications demonstrating the usage of the packages</li>
228      <li>writing/fixing helper programs (like japitools) and scripts</li>
229      <li>report bugs</li>
230      <li>help fixing the documentation</li>
231      <li>help in other related Free software projects
232      (e.g. virtual machine development,
233       <createlink name="GUMP" url="http://gump.apache.org/">)
234    </ul>
235    <p>
236    Here are some rough guidelines for deciding whether or not it would be
237    wise to accept a contribution from someone that studied source code
238    for another implementation of the core libraries or is under contract
239    with some company covering implementations of core library classes.
240    <p>
241    If the developer got access to the source code by signing some
242    contract (like the SCSL) with Sun then it would be best to examine
243    that contract (by FSF legal) before deciding.
244    <p>
245    If the developer just accidentally saw some of the source code and had
246    no intention (and didn't actually) study the implementation (with the
247    intention of contributing to GNU Classpath) there is no problem.
248    <p>
249    Studying a proprietary implementation with the intention of
250    implementing it (better) for GNU Classpath is a clear no-no.
251    <strong>The general rule is that if you have looked at or studied any
252    (proprietary) implementation of a package you should not work on that
253    package for GNU Classpath.</strong> That is because it would be
254    difficult to proof that you really did an independent
255    implementation. Since what you create might look very similar (which
256    is not unlikely). Working on something completely unrelated is OK (as
257    long as there are no contractual obligations with Sun or some other
258    company to not do this of course).
259    <p>
260    The important thing is that we want to be clear on the fact that we
261    created an independent implementation. We don't want to get into
262    tricky legal situations. We want to avoid risking to go to court over
263    reverse engineering or clean room situation questions if not
264    absolutely necessary. That is why we in general just say "please don't
265    contribute if you looked at other implementations". If someone thinks
266    that their actions might be explained as copying directly or
267    indirectly another (proprietary) implementation then that could be a
268    problem that we want to avoid.
269    <p>
270    FSF Legal will always advise not to take any unnecessary risks that
271    might endanger the (perceived) free software status of a GNU
272    project. (If we might need to go to court to proof that what we did
273    was OK, then don't!)
274    <p>
275    This isn't a GNU Classpath project specific issue.
276    See <createlink name="GNU: Reading Non-Free Code"
277    url="http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Reading-Non_002dFree-Code.html">.
278  </faq>  </faq>
279    
280  <faq question="I'm tainted by; can I help anyway?">  <faq question="I'm tainted by; can I help anyway?">

Legend:
Removed from v.1.16  
changed lines
  Added in v.1.17

savannah-hackers-public@gnu.org
ViewVC Help
Powered by ViewVC 1.1.26