Dockerized IdP

[John Gasper]

Yep, never claimed to be a lawyer... In fact I'm pretty sure early on in
the conversation that I was not. I will see if Unicon is willing to
undertake that obligation... Otherwise we'll figure something out.


And my comment about the Docker automated build was a joke on my part.
Hopefully it was taken as such, but I do understand. Writing/working with
software is fun... Licensing is not.


>Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:16:25 +0000
>From: Ian Young <ian at iay.org.uk>
>To: Shib Users <users at shibboleth.net>
>Subject: Re: Dockerized IdP
>Message-ID: <736FA9D2-8D1B-4DF7-9817-87E66AA0882C at iay.org.uk>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>> On 8 Mar 2016, at 17:30, John Gasper <jgasper at unicon.net> wrote:
>> 
>> Item A, I'll check to see if the license is include in the otherwise
>> unmodified Java distribution.
>
>I do not believe that just including the license is enough to satisfy the
>terms. If it was, I am pretty sure that Docker Hub would have an official
>Java base image containing the Oracle JDK and we wouldn't be having this
>conversation. We'd probably also have the Oracle JDK as an option in
>Linux distributions. Oracle used to allow this kind of redistribution,
>but now do not.
>
>You may of course feel that you understand the Oracle license well enough
>to know how it applies (and better than, say, the Docker and Ubuntu
>people). If I were in your shoes, however, I would make sure that my
>employer's lawyers were of the same opinion.
>
>> Item B, I'll check with Unicon's executives to see what they think about
>> the indemnification section.
>
>I think that's wise.
>
>> If not, then yes I suppose we'll need to
>> figure something else out, either using and throughly testing OpenJDK
>> releases (which is much easier to do in container since the releases are
>> controlled) or just providing the tidbits to add to the user's own
>>image,
>> which I think I mentioned in an earlier email.
>> 
>> Perhaps it does not matter, but I do not actually push to Docker Hub,
>>but
>> it does an automated build. :D
>
>I have to doubt that making Docker Inc's systems violate the Oracle
>license on your behalf is really going to help you out much from a legal
>perspective.
>
>I'd like to say I'm joking here, but I'm afraid I'm not. I (and the other
>project members) are probably a bit more sensitive about licensing issues
>than most, but in many cases it's because we've been bitten once and are
>now twice shy. As a result, we tend to read things like licenses very
>carefully and make sure that there's no way for things to come back to
>bite us. Sometimes that approach means you can't do what you'd like to,
>unfortunately.
>
>	-- Ian
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: smime.p7s
>Type: application/pkcs7-signature
>Size: 3563 bytes
>Desc: not available
>URL: 
><http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20160308/8de9181d/attac
>hment.p7s>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Subject: Digest Footer
>
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list send an email to
>users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of users Digest, Vol 57, Issue 66
>*************************************