You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Mario Ivankovits <im...@apache.org> on 2006/08/05 07:57:13 UTC
Adding LGPL library to Jakarta projects - Commons-VFS as reference
Hi!
Motivated by a personal discussion with Cliff during the ApacheCon EU
2006 I kicked a thread at pmc@jakarta about the rules how to add LGPL
stuff to our projects.
The vote passed with 17 +1, 2 -0 and 1 -1.
Which means in general the PMC at Jakarta agreed on the rules when and
how to add a LGPL library to a Jakarta project.
I put the rules in our wiki at
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/Using_LGPL'd_code (section: Latest
LGPL@jakarta informations (2006) - I'll remove the rest of the page
after the final approvement)
To make it easier I'll paste the rules once again here:
1) ask the original library author to change its license or provide a
double licensing model
2) look for an alternative implementation with an ASF friendly license
3) the build script BY DEFAULT excludes java classes depending on LGPL
4) a special parameter will enable building these classes
5) its not allowed to bundle the LGPL library with any distribution
(nightly, release)
6) the function the library gains from the LGPL stuff is fully optional
7) a bridging api (which can reside within the same project - so can be
hosted at apache) will be used to access these LGPL stuff to clearly
show its optional behaviour
8) a vote for adding a LGPL dependency to a project on pmc@
Is this the correct and acceptable way?
Together with this vote we voted to allow the JCIFS library
(http://jcifs.samba.org/) being a dependency for VFS. This library
allows access to windows shares.
The briding API in VFS is located in the org.apache.commons.vfs.provider
package
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/commons/proper/vfs/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/vfs/provider/smb
This vote passed with 14 +1
As you might notice this code already exist. It was there before I pick
up VFS and IMHO sometimes in the past the license of the JCIFS library
changed to LGPL without noticing it.
Now, if legal approve the above rules I'll start setup the VFS build to
match rule 3+4 all other rules are already achieved.
Some more words to the -0/-1 during the "LGPL rules":
Well, during the discussion it was often the talk about "GPL and LGPL"
or "(L)GPL" - so we somehow mixed those both licenses.
IF legal@ approve our procedure, I think it would be nice if legal@
could setup a short wiki about the WHY we allow it (especially for the
LGPL thing (not GPL) - something easy to read ;-) ) so that big
companies can follow our argumentation more easily and maybe don't have
that much problems with projects gaining functionality from optional
LGPL libraries.
I think this is a serious concern we have to address. Companies should
not have the impression the ASF license is somehow tampered with such a
procedure.
If we don't manage to express our thoughts it might be best to cancel
this thing.
Legal@, you have the last word ;-)
Thanks!
Ciao,
Mario
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Adding LGPL library to Jakarta projects - Commons-VFS as reference
Posted by Mario Ivankovits <im...@apache.org>.
Hi Henri!
> After what's said in the 3rd party doc
> (http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html), it comes down to
> individual PMC policy. For example there's no legal@ requirement to
> ask people to relicense or to implement the code as a bridging API
> (both seem like good ideas though).
Great news!
So count in another project. commons-vfs is using the JCIFS library to
access windows shares.
Thanks for the Info!
Ciao,
Mario
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Adding LGPL library to Jakarta projects - Commons-VFS as reference
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
We have - apologies if that didn't come across in the previous thread.
Cliff's 3rd-party doc is being treated as 'the way it will be' and we
have at least one project I know of with an LGPL dependency (Roller
depends on Hibernate, though it's aiming to move off of that at some
point).
After what's said in the 3rd party doc
(http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html), it comes down to
individual PMC policy. For example there's no legal@ requirement to
ask people to relicense or to implement the code as a bridging API
(both seem like good ideas though).
Hen
On 11/13/06, Mario Ivankovits <im...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Now that Java is getting something between GPL and LGPL it might be time
> to officially allow at least non-distributed, optional LGPL dependencies?
>
> Just an idea :-)
>
> Ciao,
> Mario
> > Motivated by a personal discussion with Cliff during the ApacheCon EU
> > 2006 I kicked a thread at pmc@jakarta about the rules how to add LGPL
> > stuff to our projects.
> >
> > The vote passed with 17 +1, 2 -0 and 1 -1.
> > Which means in general the PMC at Jakarta agreed on the rules when and
> > how to add a LGPL library to a Jakarta project.
> > I put the rules in our wiki at
> > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/Using_LGPL'd_code (section: Latest
> > LGPL@jakarta informations (2006) - I'll remove the rest of the page
> > after the final approvement)
> >
> > To make it easier I'll paste the rules once again here:
> >
> > 1) ask the original library author to change its license or provide a
> > double licensing model
> > 2) look for an alternative implementation with an ASF friendly license
> > 3) the build script BY DEFAULT excludes java classes depending on LGPL
> > 4) a special parameter will enable building these classes
> > 5) its not allowed to bundle the LGPL library with any distribution
> > (nightly, release)
> > 6) the function the library gains from the LGPL stuff is fully optional
> > 7) a bridging api (which can reside within the same project - so can be
> > hosted at apache) will be used to access these LGPL stuff to clearly
> > show its optional behaviour
> > 8) a vote for adding a LGPL dependency to a project on pmc@
> >
> > Is this the correct and acceptable way?
> >
> > Together with this vote we voted to allow the JCIFS library
> > (http://jcifs.samba.org/) being a dependency for VFS. This library
> > allows access to windows shares.
> > The briding API in VFS is located in the org.apache.commons.vfs.provider
> > package
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/commons/proper/vfs/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/vfs/provider/smb
> > This vote passed with 14 +1
> >
> > As you might notice this code already exist. It was there before I pick
> > up VFS and IMHO sometimes in the past the license of the JCIFS library
> > changed to LGPL without noticing it.
> >
> > Now, if legal approve the above rules I'll start setup the VFS build to
> > match rule 3+4 all other rules are already achieved.
> >
> >
> > Some more words to the -0/-1 during the "LGPL rules":
> >
> > Well, during the discussion it was often the talk about "GPL and LGPL"
> > or "(L)GPL" - so we somehow mixed those both licenses.
> > IF legal@ approve our procedure, I think it would be nice if legal@
> > could setup a short wiki about the WHY we allow it (especially for the
> > LGPL thing (not GPL) - something easy to read ;-) ) so that big
> > companies can follow our argumentation more easily and maybe don't have
> > that much problems with projects gaining functionality from optional
> > LGPL libraries.
> >
> > I think this is a serious concern we have to address. Companies should
> > not have the impression the ASF license is somehow tampered with such a
> > procedure.
> > If we don't manage to express our thoughts it might be best to cancel
> > this thing.
> >
> > Legal@, you have the last word ;-)
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Ciao,
> > Mario
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> > only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> > constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> > and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> > official ASF policies and documents.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Mario
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Adding LGPL library to Jakarta projects - Commons-VFS as reference
Posted by Mario Ivankovits <im...@apache.org>.
Hi!
Now that Java is getting something between GPL and LGPL it might be time
to officially allow at least non-distributed, optional LGPL dependencies?
Just an idea :-)
Ciao,
Mario
> Motivated by a personal discussion with Cliff during the ApacheCon EU
> 2006 I kicked a thread at pmc@jakarta about the rules how to add LGPL
> stuff to our projects.
>
> The vote passed with 17 +1, 2 -0 and 1 -1.
> Which means in general the PMC at Jakarta agreed on the rules when and
> how to add a LGPL library to a Jakarta project.
> I put the rules in our wiki at
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/Using_LGPL'd_code (section: Latest
> LGPL@jakarta informations (2006) - I'll remove the rest of the page
> after the final approvement)
>
> To make it easier I'll paste the rules once again here:
>
> 1) ask the original library author to change its license or provide a
> double licensing model
> 2) look for an alternative implementation with an ASF friendly license
> 3) the build script BY DEFAULT excludes java classes depending on LGPL
> 4) a special parameter will enable building these classes
> 5) its not allowed to bundle the LGPL library with any distribution
> (nightly, release)
> 6) the function the library gains from the LGPL stuff is fully optional
> 7) a bridging api (which can reside within the same project - so can be
> hosted at apache) will be used to access these LGPL stuff to clearly
> show its optional behaviour
> 8) a vote for adding a LGPL dependency to a project on pmc@
>
> Is this the correct and acceptable way?
>
> Together with this vote we voted to allow the JCIFS library
> (http://jcifs.samba.org/) being a dependency for VFS. This library
> allows access to windows shares.
> The briding API in VFS is located in the org.apache.commons.vfs.provider
> package
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/commons/proper/vfs/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/vfs/provider/smb
> This vote passed with 14 +1
>
> As you might notice this code already exist. It was there before I pick
> up VFS and IMHO sometimes in the past the license of the JCIFS library
> changed to LGPL without noticing it.
>
> Now, if legal approve the above rules I'll start setup the VFS build to
> match rule 3+4 all other rules are already achieved.
>
>
> Some more words to the -0/-1 during the "LGPL rules":
>
> Well, during the discussion it was often the talk about "GPL and LGPL"
> or "(L)GPL" - so we somehow mixed those both licenses.
> IF legal@ approve our procedure, I think it would be nice if legal@
> could setup a short wiki about the WHY we allow it (especially for the
> LGPL thing (not GPL) - something easy to read ;-) ) so that big
> companies can follow our argumentation more easily and maybe don't have
> that much problems with projects gaining functionality from optional
> LGPL libraries.
>
> I think this is a serious concern we have to address. Companies should
> not have the impression the ASF license is somehow tampered with such a
> procedure.
> If we don't manage to express our thoughts it might be best to cancel
> this thing.
>
> Legal@, you have the last word ;-)
>
>
> Thanks!
> Ciao,
> Mario
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
--
Mario
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org