You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tinkerpop.apache.org by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com> on 2015/02/06 16:36:46 UTC
Bump to Neo4j 2.1.6
I just bumped the Neo4j dependencies in TP3 to the latest release of Neo4j
- so neo4j-gremlin is now at Neo4j 2.1.6. Test suites passed happily so it
seems good to go.
Snapshots should be published as soon as Travis completes its build.
Thanks,
Stephen
Re: Bump to Neo4j 2.1.6
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
It does not necessarily need to be apache, there are other accepted
licenses. Not AGPL though.
An IP (as in Intellectual Property) owner, well, owns the work and can
do whatever he pleases with that. He may make it available to others
under the term of a license. Every license, open source or not (most
licenses are not oss, think EULAs) specifies what rights and obligations
the both parties have. Neo4j made conscious decisions about what
business model and what license would serve them best. Regardless of how
much you like a technology, Tinkerpop will not be allowed to release
with dependencies on non-approved licenses.
The constraint is of a legal nature, the ASF has no intention or
strategy to hurt any vendor, quite the contrary. Possible solutions to
your problem are:
1. All code related to non-approved licenses stays somewhere outside the
ASF. The ASF (P)PMC cannot be associated in any way with managing that.
However individuals can do whatever they want in a non-ASF capacity.
2. (This worked well in similar situations). Have the 3rd party (Neo4j
in this case) to re/dual license the api/required dependency and a mock
under an acceptable license like ALv2. Someone may be able to negotiate
and explain the mutual benefit of having better integrated/tested
together. This way, the ASF code would depend on only on ALv2 licensed
components, and it could be documented somewhere how to setup the 2
technologies to work together.
If you have any questions let me know. I'd be happy to provide further help,
Hadrian
On 02/06/2015 11:27 AM, Marko Rodriguez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Neo4j is not Apache, but AGPL. Our TinkerPop3 integration code is Apache2. Note that we added this to the branch:
>
> https://github.com/tinkerpop/tinkerpop3/blob/master/neo4j-gremlin/LICENSE.txt#L1-L12
>
> If we CAN NOT depend on anything AGPL, we can gut Neo4j from the repository and have the binding maintained by someone on GitHub. The reason we really like Neo4j in there is:
>
> 1. It is the most popular graph database.
> 2. It is an OLTP system and mirrors our OLAP Giraph bindings nicely -- "two reference implementations: one OLTP and one OLAP".
>
> Thoughts?,
> Marko.
>
> http://markorodriguez.com
>
> On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think I have some vague memory about neo4j not being licensed in a way acceptable to the ASF.
>>
>> I will check it later today, but licensing [1] is an important aspect you should be aware of.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Hadrian
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>>
>>
>> On 02/06/2015 10:36 AM, Stephen Mallette wrote:
>>> I just bumped the Neo4j dependencies in TP3 to the latest release of Neo4j
>>> - so neo4j-gremlin is now at Neo4j 2.1.6. Test suites passed happily so it
>>> seems good to go.
>>>
>>> Snapshots should be published as soon as Travis completes its build.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Stephen
>>>
>
Re: Bump to Neo4j 2.1.6
Posted by Marko Rodriguez <ok...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Neo4j is not Apache, but AGPL. Our TinkerPop3 integration code is Apache2. Note that we added this to the branch:
https://github.com/tinkerpop/tinkerpop3/blob/master/neo4j-gremlin/LICENSE.txt#L1-L12
If we CAN NOT depend on anything AGPL, we can gut Neo4j from the repository and have the binding maintained by someone on GitHub. The reason we really like Neo4j in there is:
1. It is the most popular graph database.
2. It is an OLTP system and mirrors our OLAP Giraph bindings nicely -- "two reference implementations: one OLTP and one OLAP".
Thoughts?,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
On Feb 6, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think I have some vague memory about neo4j not being licensed in a way acceptable to the ASF.
>
> I will check it later today, but licensing [1] is an important aspect you should be aware of.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>
>
> On 02/06/2015 10:36 AM, Stephen Mallette wrote:
>> I just bumped the Neo4j dependencies in TP3 to the latest release of Neo4j
>> - so neo4j-gremlin is now at Neo4j 2.1.6. Test suites passed happily so it
>> seems good to go.
>>
>> Snapshots should be published as soon as Travis completes its build.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>
Re: Bump to Neo4j 2.1.6
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
I think I have some vague memory about neo4j not being licensed in a way
acceptable to the ASF.
I will check it later today, but licensing [1] is an important aspect
you should be aware of.
Cheers,
Hadrian
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
On 02/06/2015 10:36 AM, Stephen Mallette wrote:
> I just bumped the Neo4j dependencies in TP3 to the latest release of Neo4j
> - so neo4j-gremlin is now at Neo4j 2.1.6. Test suites passed happily so it
> seems good to go.
>
> Snapshots should be published as soon as Travis completes its build.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
>