I’ve followed Jetty for years and years. I’ve generally held Greg Wilkins, the man behind the project, in high regard. But he’s posted a rant, and I’m worried that others might take him on faith. I’m actually rather hoping somebody broke into his blog and posted this behind his back (e.g., his links are borked).

Before I begin, please understand that I’ve griped about Google/OHA’s communications crackdown repeatedly, in this blog and on the Android Google Groups. I’ve tried to be rather even-handed about it, though, and so I frequently find myself writing in opposition to those who seem to think Google has turned into Satan (and, no, not the old network analysis tool). I don’t agree with their decision, but I respect their right to make it, and until they either miss the Q4 deadline or make it and fail to be as open as they claimed, I’m not going to cast aspersions.

Apparently unlike Mr. Wilkins, unfortunately:

While not an IP issue, there is a real issue that google may have infringed the GPL by attempting to limit distribution rights with an NDA

The key word there being “may”. So long as the NDA does not prohibit redistribution of the GPL-affected source code (http://code.google.com/p/android/source/checkout), or otherwise restrict their rights to use that source code, the NDA and the GPL are orthogonal. I am sure Webtide has access to qualified IP counsel; so do Google/OHA, so one would think they have a strong chance of being legally safe here. I do know that Google has oodles of experience with NDAs (unfortunately), and so I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on the legal side. Mr. Wilkins apparently disagrees.

Does this mean I think the NDA was a good idea? No. I think the NDA and private SDKs were a dumb business move, at least for the portions of “business” that I can see from my perch well outside Sillicon Valley. But there’s a difference between “dumb” and “copyright violation”, which is what a GPL violation technically is.

Those promises have proved hollow and the terms of the licenses used have been disrespected at least in spirit, if not in the letter.

I can’t argue, except to say that a three-month quiet period isn’t exactly earth-shattering. Heck, some firms go through that just because of legal requirements for an IPO — does this mean all firms who undergo an IPO are immediately and irrevocably banned from leading open source projects?

But we have no idea if the secret APIs that google will not reveal might include HTTP and/or servlet capability and our efforts will be for naught.

Ah, but the key question is: did he ever ask?

And, no, a rant on a blog does not count as asking.

I’ve exchanged emails with members of the Android team during this blackout, and while they’re pretty tight-lipped, a simple pointed question regarding the continued relevance of i-jetty might well get a useful answer.

I follow the Android Google Groups and I’ve never seen him post the question there, either. Heck, when I searched the groups for references to i-jetty, one of the few I found was my own post, mentioning it as an option for somebody trying to cram Tomcat onto a phone.

Of course, it’s entirely possible he did ask, and either got no answer or something he deemed insufficient. I have no way of knowing, and he didn’t say in his post.

I’m not saying Google/OHA should get a free pass. I’m definitely not saying Mr. Wilkins or other Jetty contributors should be doing anything vis a vis i-jetty — they should let it drop if they want. But it’s one thing to say “hey, guys, we’re backing off i-jetty until Google gets its sh*t together” and another thing to claim GPL violations and ethical breaches. Glass houses, stones, and all that.

If you’re going to back away from Android, all I ask for is civility. Do unto others, etc., etc.