You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by "Marvin Humphrey (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2010/11/09 20:31:12 UTC
[jira] Created: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
------------------------------------
Key: LEGAL-86
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
Project: Legal Discuss
Issue Type: Question
Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
[http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
* At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
* Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
* Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
We have two questions:
* Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
License?
* Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] [Closed] (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Marvin Humphrey (Closed) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Marvin Humphrey closed LEGAL-86.
--------------------------------
Resolution: Unresolved
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Marvin Humphrey (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13137531#comment-13137531 ]
Marvin Humphrey commented on LEGAL-86:
--------------------------------------
With the resolution of LUCY-133 and LUCY-134, Lucy svn trunk no longer has any
non-core Perl dependencies (thought the 0.2 maintenance branch still has
them). The limited variance discussed in this issue has served its purpose
and we have no further need to explore the issue of usage under the Artistic
license 1.0.
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Marvin Humphrey (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12997447#comment-12997447 ]
Marvin Humphrey commented on LEGAL-86:
--------------------------------------
> No concerns about usage at build time. No concerns about usage in cookbook.
That's great. :) That resolves questions about our usage of Parse::RecDescent,
which is the more difficult of the two dependencies to replace.
> If the dependency is other than from code written in Perl, can somebody
> clarify what the dependency is?
At this point, Lucy can only be used via its Perl bindings. Therefore, all
userland code which depends on Lucy and by proxy on JSON::XS will be Perl
code.
Removing Lucy's runtime dependency on JSON::XS is a prerequisite for adding
other language bindings, so before Lucy publishes public APIs for Python,
Ruby, or even C, this issue will have been rendered moot.
Internally, Lucy core code, which is written in C, reads and writes JSON via a
generic interface defined in
[http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/lucy/trunk/core/Lucy/Util/Json.cfh?view=markup].
The implementation behind that interface presently calls back into Perl; the
actual code utilizing JSON::XS is in
[http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/lucy/trunk/perl/lib/Lucy.pm?view=markup],
lines 530-600.
Eliminating JSON::XS as a dependency will require either changing the
implementation to use a different library or writing our own parser a la
[https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-58]. That's our eventual plan,
but the current code is very stable and we'd prefer not to mess with it just
prior to our first release, since screwups will result in index corruption.
Lucy uses JSON to write index metadata, such as schema files. No part of
Lucy's runtime usage of JSON is exposed via a public API; the encoding of the
index files is an implementation detail.
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Sam Ruby (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12997472#comment-12997472 ]
Sam Ruby commented on LEGAL-86:
-------------------------------
> At this point, Lucy can only be used via its Perl bindings. Therefore, all
> userland code which depends on Lucy and by proxy on JSON::XS will be Perl
> code.
>
> Removing Lucy's runtime dependency on JSON::XS is a prerequisite for adding
> other language bindings, so before Lucy publishes public APIs for Python,
> Ruby, or even C, this issue will have been rendered moot.
I approve of this plan
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Chris A. Mattmann (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12997283#comment-12997283 ]
Chris A. Mattmann commented on LEGAL-86:
----------------------------------------
Hi All -- any resolution on this? Sam? Comments? This is seriously hindering our Lucy Incubator first release and a resolution would help us not have to go through any more effort to side-track these dependencies.
Cheers,
Chris
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Stefano Bagnara (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12930336#action_12930336 ]
Stefano Bagnara commented on LEGAL-86:
--------------------------------------
I don't know the answers, but we talked about the same license in LEGAL-64.
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Marvin Humphrey (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12930366#action_12930366 ]
Marvin Humphrey commented on LEGAL-86:
--------------------------------------
Thanks, Stefano, I studied LEGAL-64. Had it been officially resolved and the
Artistic License been categorized, it may not have been necessary to open this
issue.
I think we're in the clear for our usage. We aren't bundling the
dependencies, so the distribution terms would only apply to derivative works
of the libraries in question within our codebase. The Artistic License
version 2.0 goes out of its way to say that basic usage is not enough to
trigger its provisions:
http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0
(9) Works (including, but not limited to, modules and scripts) that merely
extend or make use of the Package, do not, by themselves, cause the Package to
be a Modified Version. In addition, such works are not considered parts of the
Package itself, and are not subject to the terms of this license.
The relevant passage within version 1.0 is murkier:
http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_1_0
8. Aggregation of this Package with a commercial distribution is always
permitted provided that the use of this Package is embedded; that is, when no
overt attempt is made to make this Package's interfaces visible to the end
user of the commercial distribution. Such use shall not be construed as a
distribution of this Package.
However, the Perl Foundation considers version 2.0 to be mostly a
clarification of 1.0:
http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_2_0_notes
The terms of Artistic 2.0 are the same as Artistic 1.0, aside from the added
patent clause and relicensing clause.
Basically, all we need is to determine that the portions of Apache Lucy which
interface with the two CPAN distributions in question are not considered
"Modified Versions" of those distributions. (This is very different from the
FSF's interpretation of the GPL -- under the GPL, according to the FSF, those
portions of Lucy *would* be considered derivative works.) Once we make that
determination, then we can list those libraries as prerequisites which the
user must install. Thanks to CPAN, that's not an unreasonable burden.
Eventually we plan to do away with both dependencies, but that will take time
and we'd prefer not to have that task block our first release.
It seems to me that this is different from the use case covered in LEGAL-64.
I think our usage is more typical; it's very common for CPAN distros to list
other CPAN distros as prerequisites.
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
[jira] Commented: (LEGAL-86) Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
Posted by "Sam Ruby (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12997415#comment-12997415 ]
Sam Ruby commented on LEGAL-86:
-------------------------------
No concerns about usage at build time. No concerns about usage in cookbook.
Based on a quick peek at the web site, it is not clear to me that the usage at runtime is from code in Lucy written in Perl. If so, I have no concern about Perl code depending on code hosted in CPAN which is made available under the same license as Perl. If the dependency is other than from code written in Perl, can somebody clarify what the dependency is?
> Artistic License / CPAN dependencies
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: LEGAL-86
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-86
> Project: Legal Discuss
> Issue Type: Question
> Reporter: Marvin Humphrey
>
> The Apache Lucy Incubator podling is working to pare down its list of
> dependencies, but there are two CPAN distributions which we would like to
> put off replacing for the time being (Parse::RecDescent and JSON::XS).
> These two distributions are both licensed, as is common for CPAN modules,
> under the "same terms as Perl itself". Perl's licensing is here:
> [http://dev.perl.org/licenses/]
> We do not wish to bundle these CPAN distributions with Lucy, but instead
> specify them as prerequisites. We assert that our usage of the modules in
> question falls under the terms of the Artistic License and *not* the GPL.
> Lucy interfaces with these modules in three places:
> * At build time (Parse::RecDescent).
> * Within Lucy itself at runtime (JSON::XS).
> * Within sample/cookbook code (Parse::RecDescent).
> We have two questions:
> * Is it acceptable for code released under the Apache License 2.0 to have
> a non-optional dependency on code which is licensed under the Artistic
> License?
> * Is it acceptable to classify these modules as "system dependencies",
> which the user is expected to install?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org