[OpenJDK Rasterizer] Rasterizer replacement proposal

[Dmitri Trembovetski]

   Hi Roman,

   getting back on the list.

Roman Kennke wrote:
> Hi Dmitri,
> 
> first of all, you should continue discussion on the mailing list IMO. It
> doesn't leave a good impression against 'the community' when half of the
> discussions are held privately. I won't CC the list now though, because
> you might have had a reason not to do this in the first place. If you
> feel like we could discuss that openly, then please CC the list again
> when answering.

   Just to clarify: whenever possible legal questions are involved,
   I tend to be a bit hesitant to involve large audiences, which
   was the reason I went off the list.

   However, in this case it will be useful for everybody
   else to understand the restrictions under which we currently
   operate.

>>    I think there are still legal issues preventing
>>    us looking at this code =(
> 
> Unbelievable. But oh well... Why exactly can't you *look* at the code.
> Because it's not submitted via the SCA? I mean, it's free, open source
> software after all. Are you not allowed to look at any code except Sun
> copyrighted?

   Yes, our understanding is that we can not look at your code until
   you share the copyright (and we can be reasonably sure that you
   own that copyright) - both of these conditions are not yet
   satisfied here - the second one because you mentioned about
   the possibility of your employer's involvement, so we wanted
   to clarify that first.

   I don't think it's Sun only policy, pretty much any company has it.
   It is easy to become tainted by looking at other's people code.
   The fact that the code is open-source doesn't matter, since
   it's a question of copyright.

>>    This particular piece got the attention:
>>  > and will do the copyright grantback procedure and sign the SCA (I think
>>  > my employer (aicas) already did so for me even) to make this code
>>
>>    You have to sign the SCA yourself, your company
>>    can't do that for you - that's what the lawyers here
>>    say anyway. Also, it is not clear from your message
>>    if your company  holds the copyright for this code
>>    (i.e. Sun holds copyright for all job-related code
>>    I write while working for Sun, so I can't say that
>>    I own the copyright even if I wrote all the code
>>    myself)
> 
> I have to ask my boss(es). I believe that I am the copyright holder of
> that code because I didn't write it in my work time, and not for the
> purpuse of using it in the JamaicaVM, and I submitted this particular
> piece of code under my personal FSF copyright assignment. But it is no
> problem for me to sign the SCA myself too. However, as I pointed out,
> I'd first hear your opinion if that code is useful for you before I
> start the copyright-grantback dance with the FSF. I hope that doesn't
> cause a deadlock (if it really does, I might rethink, but it is my hope
> that Sun opens up a little more in this respect).

   I'm afraid that we won't be able to look at it until
   you sign the SCA.

>>    The good news is that Jim integrated his AA renderer
>>    interface, which you use for your rasterizer.
>>    I'll ask Jim again to at least publish the javadocs
>>    now on the list, because it will take a couple
>>    of weeks for the fix to get into the promoted build,
>>    which you would be able to access.
> 
> Javadocs would be very helpful for a start.

   Jim has sent the javadocs. He mentioned that he might
   make one change (change AATileGenerator to be an interface
   instead of an abstract class - we've missed that during
   the review) before it goes out.

>>    I hope we'll make it easier for you and others to work
>>    directly with our 2D workspace instead of waiting for
>>    the fix to propagate to the main j2se workspace.
> 
> Yeah, this seems like the biggest complaint right now. It is not really
> possible for the community (e.g. me) to help out with code like this
> when development is basically done behind closed doors. I am quite sure
> that I could help out with both the rasterizer as well as with the
> fonts, but it doesn't make much sense (and isn't very motivating) to
> develop against code that is a couple of days/weeks old.

   I agree that the current situation is totally unacceptable.

   It is also unfortunate that you do not have access to our
   code review system - although this is relatively easy
   to fix - we can include you as a reviewer in relevant
   code changes (the system is email and web-based).

   We'll have to send you the actual diffs directly, though,
   as you won't be able to access the web interface.

> I think it would make sense to at least provide read access to the real
> group workspace (if you're paranoid then maybe only to group members,
> but then comes the question, how can anybody become a group member?).

   I'll see if we could arrange that. I believe that it is our
   intention anyway - once we move to Mercurial each "group" will have
   their read/write mercurial workspace and members of the group
   will have read and in some cases write access.

   But at this point even a read-only svn workspace would help.

   Thank you,
     Dmitri