FW: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License

[Dave Birdsall <da...@esgyn.com>]

We use some Facebook classes in the implementation of NAString. Is there a license issue there?

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndament@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2017 8:32 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License

All,

I plan to send the below email, or some form of it, to all podlings in the coming days.  I don't think anything on here is private or confidential so I don't think it's an issue discussing it in the open.  Podlings who may be reading this, please understand that this is a draft only.  Feel free to discuss and provide input on this list as well.  Do not take the contents of this email as a final decision or path forward until you have received it on your dev list.

-------------------
Dear Podlings,

I'm writing to inform you of a legal decision that has been made that may impact your podling.  During a recent request [1], the foundation reviewed the license on a project called RocksDB which at that time was licensed under the Facebook BSD+Patents License.  Based on the foundation's review, it was determined that software that used this license fell under what we call Category X, the category for all licenses that may not be included in Apache products.  In turn, RocksDB was relicensed to the Apache license.
This license is used in a number of other Facebook Open Source projects.  A request was then made to relicense other software under the Apache License.  This request was declined.

I wanted to reach out to all podlings at this point to reiterate the goals of incubation.  We don't expect that you have perfect releases while in the incubator, but that by the time you exit the incubator you are complying with foundation policy around all of your releases.  So what does this mean? Basically, while you are incubating if you are using a project that is shipped with this license you should follow these guidelines:

- While producing a source release, ensure that no source code with this license is in your release.
- Avoid creating a binary release with this software in it.
- Podlings who are not already using software with this license should not add it as a dependency.
- By the time you graduate, you must have removed this as a dependency within your project.

Basically, we are counting on the fact that a disclaimer is present in your release bundle to mitigate the foundation defined incorrect release structure.  There may be some podlings that feel that the libraries in question are critical to their functionality.  Many of these libraries have alternatives to consider which you may find useful.  However, if you get to a point where you feel that switching is a blocker to being a successful project, please bring it up with your mentors and/or other IPMC members so that we can help you plan for a way forward.

Regards,

John D. Ament
VP, Apache Incubator

[1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303

RE: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License

[Steve Varnau <st...@esgyn.com>]

I don't think so, Dave.  Looks like those dependencies were removed in the past or are things released under ASFv2 license.
Trafodion doesn't have any references to the license in question.

--Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Birdsall [mailto:dave.birdsall@esgyn.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 9:03 AM
> To: dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: FW: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License
> 
> We use some Facebook classes in the implementation of NAString. Is there a
> license issue there?
> 
> Dave
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John D. Ament [mailto:johndament@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2017 8:32 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License
> 
> All,
> 
> I plan to send the below email, or some form of it, to all podlings in the
> coming days.  I don't think anything on here is private or confidential so I
> don't think it's an issue discussing it in the open.  Podlings who may be
> reading this, please understand that this is a draft only.  Feel free to discuss
> and provide input on this list as well.  Do not take the contents of this email
> as a final decision or path forward until you have received it on your dev list.
> 
> -------------------
> Dear Podlings,
> 
> I'm writing to inform you of a legal decision that has been made that may
> impact your podling.  During a recent request [1], the foundation reviewed
> the license on a project called RocksDB which at that time was licensed under
> the Facebook BSD+Patents License.  Based on the foundation's review, it was
> determined that software that used this license fell under what we call
> Category X, the category for all licenses that may not be included in Apache
> products.  In turn, RocksDB was relicensed to the Apache license.
> This license is used in a number of other Facebook Open Source projects.  A
> request was then made to relicense other software under the Apache
> License.  This request was declined.
> 
> I wanted to reach out to all podlings at this point to reiterate the goals of
> incubation.  We don't expect that you have perfect releases while in the
> incubator, but that by the time you exit the incubator you are complying with
> foundation policy around all of your releases.  So what does this mean?
> Basically, while you are incubating if you are using a project that is shipped
> with this license you should follow these guidelines:
> 
> - While producing a source release, ensure that no source code with this
> license is in your release.
> - Avoid creating a binary release with this software in it.
> - Podlings who are not already using software with this license should not
> add it as a dependency.
> - By the time you graduate, you must have removed this as a dependency
> within your project.
> 
> Basically, we are counting on the fact that a disclaimer is present in your
> release bundle to mitigate the foundation defined incorrect release
> structure.  There may be some podlings that feel that the libraries in question
> are critical to their functionality.  Many of these libraries have alternatives to
> consider which you may find useful.  However, if you get to a point where
> you feel that switching is a blocker to being a successful project, please bring
> it up with your mentors and/or other IPMC members so that we can help you
> plan for a way forward.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> John D. Ament
> VP, Apache Incubator
> 
> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303