RE: xmlbeanscxx proposal (resubmitted)

[Tomasz Wielga <tw...@touk.pl>]

Dnia 30-03-2006, czw o godzinie 15:13 -0800, Jacob Danner napisał(a):
> I notice that the project has dependencies on other libraries (boost).
> Will these libraries are included in dists or will download be required.
> If the libraries will be included, is the Boost License compatible with
> the apache license?

The whole Boost library is meant to be a stadards breeding site for C++.
Much of its components, including all used by us, will probably be a
part of the C++ standard in the future. So I do not think it is
purposeful, though permited, to include them in distributions.

We also use one more library - GMP, mainly for the BigInteger like
functionality. This library is distributed under LGPL, so downloading
and dynamic linking is the only possibility. In my opinion legal issue
is not a problem here, as is portability. So there is a place for
discussion.

-- 
Tomasz Wielga <tw...@touk.pl>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xmlbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xmlbeans.apache.org

Re: xmlbeanscxx proposal (resubmitted)

[Tomasz Wielga <tw...@touk.pl>]

Hi

> Apache does not allow distribution of LGPL components within an Apache
> product. [...]

Yes, I know it. That is why I have written that downloading is the only
choice. And I ment downloading independently of the project (opposite to
including).

> [...] just something that the user
> has to already have on their system (i.e. a "system requirement")?

This is so both in the case of Boost and GMP.

> Can you us a list of the licenses that apply to parts of the initial
> codebase that were not written by you or one of the other initial
> committers?

Those are the only two. And they are not parts of initial codebase but
just external requirements. 
We also use Log4cxx and Xerces-c but these are licensed under the Apache
Licence :).

-- 
Tomasz Wielga <tw...@touk.pl>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xmlbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xmlbeans.apache.org

Re: xmlbeanscxx proposal (resubmitted)

[Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>]

On 4/12/06, Tomasz Wielga <tw...@touk.pl> wrote:
> Dnia 30-03-2006, czw o godzinie 15:13 -0800, Jacob Danner napisał(a):
> > I notice that the project has dependencies on other libraries (boost).
> > Will these libraries are included in dists or will download be required.
> > If the libraries will be included, is the Boost License compatible with
> > the apache license?
>
> The whole Boost library is meant to be a stadards breeding site for C++.
> Much of its components, including all used by us, will probably be a
> part of the C++ standard in the future. So I do not think it is
> purposeful, though permited, to include them in distributions.
>
> We also use one more library - GMP, mainly for the BigInteger like
> functionality. This library is distributed under LGPL, so downloading
> and dynamic linking is the only possibility. In my opinion legal issue
> is not a problem here, as is portability. So there is a place for
> discussion.

Tomasz,

Apache does not allow distribution of LGPL components within an Apache
product.  There are many open source licenses that are allowed, but
there are a few others that are prohibited from being within the
product.

So, it is important to understand what you propose will be in the
product and what will not.  It sounds like you are saying Boost will
not be part of the downloaded product.  Are you saying that GMP would
be required to be part of the product or just something that the user
has to already have on their system (i.e. a "system requirement")?  If
it must be part of the download, this would need to be changed during
the incubation period.

Can you us a list of the licenses that apply to parts of the initial
codebase that were not written by you or one of the other initial
committers?

Also, for anyone interested in a draft of the soon-to-be-official
Apache third-party licensing policy, see
http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html.

Thanks,
Cliff