Before I even take a look at this, I have to ask the question. Where
does the "covered by ADPL" line get crossed? I know that Ben has
requested on the ACS4.6 thread that developers
NOT
take a look at the ACS 4.6 source code. In addition, if you read
the
ADPL FAQ,
you'll note:
If I look at ACS source code covered under ADPL and apply general
ideas and concepts learned from this review in products I develop, am
I bound by ADPL?
No. The terms of ADPL would extend to direct or closely similar
reimplementations of ACS, in Java or any other language. This would
extend to close similarities at any layer of ACS: in the data model,
application logic, page flow, or presentation layer.
Unfortunately, "reading the UI wireframes for ACS Java" sounds to me
an awful lot like "close similarities ... in application logic, page
flow, or presentation layer". Or does that only apply to code, not
specifications?
Now, IANAL, and I don't want to create any difficulties here, but
has there been a decision, as a project, on whether or not we're going
to be able to continue to model directly off of ACS? I'd just like some
guidance. Personally, until I hear otherwise and clearly from reliable
sources, I am staying away from ACS 4.6 ANYTHING (code, specs, etc.).
I don't particularly
like to say that, but better safe than sorry...
