You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Giovanni Azua <gi...@imc.nl> on 2008/05/15 10:36:43 UTC
about GPL/Apache license compatibility ...
hi,
I was researching a bit alternatives to dojo e.g. YUI or separate
widgets like a tooltip developed and distributed under GPL license and
found some comments from Struts contributors mentioning that because of
those widgets being GPL they could not be considered ...
I am absolutely not an expert in the subject but having a project under
GPL v3 (and researched and read a bit on it) one of the main advantages
of v3 was the major revision that lead to compatibility with the Apache
v2 license projects see
<http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses#GPLv3-compatible_licenses>
My question is then, would this mean that if e.g. a widget is
distributed under GPL v3 it could be used and distributed with Struts 2?
Maybe it would be worthwhile to clarify this, as it could mean wider
freedom of choice integrating existing GPL v3 projects with Struts ...
Best regards,
Giovanni
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: about GPL/Apache license compatibility ...
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2008/5/15 Laurie Harper <la...@holoweb.net>:
> I dug a little deeper, and found the work-in-progress policy covering this
> issue [3]. GPL and LGPL licensed libraries are explicitly excluded from
> being included in / distributed with Apache projects there, but it doesn't
> address the new (v3) revisions of those licenses.
Notice that this does not mean that you cannot use a LGPL package as a
dependency, but only that you must not distribute it.
For example, in Struts 2 there is a JasperReports plugin.
JasperReports is LGPL, so it is not distributed, but it is used to
create a plugin (the plugin, obviously, is distributed).
The user must download JasperReports by him/herself.
Antonio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: about GPL/Apache license compatibility ...
Posted by Laurie Harper <la...@holoweb.net>.
Laurie Harper wrote:
> Giovanni Azua wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> I was researching a bit alternatives to dojo e.g. YUI or separate
>> widgets like a tooltip developed and distributed under GPL license and
>> found some comments from Struts contributors mentioning that because
>> of those widgets being GPL they could not be considered ...
>>
>> I am absolutely not an expert in the subject but having a project
>> under GPL v3 (and researched and read a bit on it) one of the main
>> advantages of v3 was the major revision that lead to compatibility
>> with the Apache v2 license projects see
>> <http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses#GPLv3-compatible_licenses>
>> My question is then, would this mean that if e.g. a widget is
>> distributed under GPL v3 it could be used and distributed with Struts 2?
>>
>> Maybe it would be worthwhile to clarify this, as it could mean wider
>> freedom of choice integrating existing GPL v3 projects with Struts ...
>
> IANAL, but my reading of the FSF license compatibility discussion is
> that the ASF license is compatible with a project using GPLv3, *not*
> that GPLv3 is compatible with an ASF licensed project like Struts. In
> other words, GPL'd projects can now import ASF licensed libraries but
> ASF licensed projects still cannot use GPL'd libs.
>
> It *is* possible that LGPLv3 may now be an acceptable license for
> dependencies, though. (I haven't looked at it to see if the
> objectionable clauses have been revised...)
>
> This has probably been discussed on legal@apache already, and that is
> the correct place to get an ASF-wide policy change approved if it's
> appropriate.
>
> L.
Update: the foundation's statement on license compatibility with the
GPLv3 [1] appears to support my position, according to the definition of
compatibility cited therein [2]. Notice that 'compatibility', by that
definition, is not commutative: 'a compatible b' does not imply 'b
compatible a'.
Note that the statement says the Apache License v2 is compatible with
GPLv3, but *not* that GPLv3 is compatible with the Apache License.
I dug a little deeper, and found the work-in-progress policy covering
this issue [3]. GPL and LGPL licensed libraries are explicitly excluded
from being included in / distributed with Apache projects there, but it
doesn't address the new (v3) revisions of those licenses.
A careful reading of that (draft) policy may give you an idea of whether
(L)GPLv3 meets the requirements for use in ASF projects but, again,
legal@apache is a better place to find guidance.
L.
[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
[2] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/compat.html
[3] http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: about GPL/Apache license compatibility ...
Posted by Laurie Harper <la...@holoweb.net>.
Giovanni Azua wrote:
> hi,
>
> I was researching a bit alternatives to dojo e.g. YUI or separate
> widgets like a tooltip developed and distributed under GPL license and
> found some comments from Struts contributors mentioning that because of
> those widgets being GPL they could not be considered ...
>
> I am absolutely not an expert in the subject but having a project under
> GPL v3 (and researched and read a bit on it) one of the main advantages
> of v3 was the major revision that lead to compatibility with the Apache
> v2 license projects see
> <http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses#GPLv3-compatible_licenses>
> My question is then, would this mean that if e.g. a widget is
> distributed under GPL v3 it could be used and distributed with Struts 2?
>
> Maybe it would be worthwhile to clarify this, as it could mean wider
> freedom of choice integrating existing GPL v3 projects with Struts ...
IANAL, but my reading of the FSF license compatibility discussion is
that the ASF license is compatible with a project using GPLv3, *not*
that GPLv3 is compatible with an ASF licensed project like Struts. In
other words, GPL'd projects can now import ASF licensed libraries but
ASF licensed projects still cannot use GPL'd libs.
It *is* possible that LGPLv3 may now be an acceptable license for
dependencies, though. (I haven't looked at it to see if the
objectionable clauses have been revised...)
This has probably been discussed on legal@apache already, and that is
the correct place to get an ASF-wide policy change approved if it's
appropriate.
L.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org