[drmaa-wg] XgridDRMAA overview

[Andreas Haas]

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Ed Baskerville wrote:

> On Jun 7, 2006, at 9:10 AM, Rayson Ho wrote:
>
> > SoC recongizes all the opensource licenses listed by the OSI:
> >
> > http://code.google.com/soc/mentorfaq.html#licenses
>
> They allow the *mentoring organization* to choose whatever OSI-
> approved license they want. However, Google is my mentoring
> organization, and Google has specifically instructed me to use the
> Apache license.
>
> However...
>
> On Jun 7, 2006, at 5:08 AM, Andreas Haas wrote:
>
> > Thus, for the time being, please let us assume any
> > change required for Xgrid DRMAA simply would be contributed back to
> > Grid
> > Engine open source project.
>
> I imagine something like that would be fine--any modified components
> of Grid Engine go back into Grid Engine; original code can be covered
> under the Apache License. I'll verify this with Google; I have no
> reason to think it wouldn't be OK.

I'm not entirely sure what the 'original code' subject means
in this paragraph. Is it what you write from scratch specifically
for Xgrid?

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I take this section from the SISSL:
>
> > 3.4 Larger Works. You may create a Larger Work by combining
> > Original Code with other code not governed by the terms of this
> > License and distribute the Larger Work as a single product. In such
> > a case, You must make sure the requirements of this License are
> > fulfilled for the Original Code.
> and this one from the Apache License:
>
> > For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not
> > include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind
> > by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
>
> to mean that I can statically link the modified Sun code in a Mac OS
> X framework as long as I release the respective source files under
> the appropriate license.

At first sight I agree with your reading, yet I'm not sure about
possible connections to the other paragraph above.

>
> > With regards to your question about the C-binding-detour: A C binding
> > for Xgrid as by-product certainly were very welcome as it would get
> > Perl,
> > Python and Ruby bindings nearly for free. Wouldn't also the extend of
> > changes required to com.sun.grid.drmaa be minimal for similar reasons?
>
> Regarding C bindings: the plan was to do those regardless of which
> route I took. Many Xgrid users are clamoring for a procedural-C
> interface to Xgrid. And I'm now fully convinced of the wisdom of
> reusing Dan's JNI code, so that shouldn't be an issue as long as
> these licensing issues work out.

Great!

Best regards,
Andreas