JTS Licensing [Re: Toward Jena 3.10.0]

[Andy Seaborne <an...@apache.org>]

It is good to be clear.

As general comment, licensing is not a problem when handled early. It is 
if it is ignored and has to be sorted out after release(s) that gets messy.

http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html

Eclipse Distribution License 1.0 is "category A" - it is like an BSD 
license without the advertising clause. We need to add some text to the 
NOTICE.

Eclipse Public License 1.0 is "category B" (it is a weak copyleft 
license) and binaries from such code can be included (i.e. shading) with 
appropriate labelling.

For JTS:

https://github.com/locationtech/jts/blob/master/LICENSES.md

JTS is dual-licensed under:

     Eclipse Public License 1.0
     Eclipse Distribution License 1.0

with some BSD/3-clause code:
   https://github.com/geotools/geotools/wiki/JTS-ORA-Contribution
   https://github.com/geotools/geotools/wiki/JTS-Shapefile-Contribution

     Andy


On 14/12/2018 20:26, Marco Neumann wrote:
> Excellent news.
> 
> 
> On Fri 14 Dec 2018 at 20:00, Greg Albiston <ga...@mail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Marco,
>>
>> The JTS project has been re-licenced last year as Eclipse Publish
>> License and Eclipse Distribution License, which are Apache compatible
>> AFAIK.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On 14/12/2018 19:53, Marco Neumann wrote:
>>> In addition could you or someone with an Apache connection clarify the
>>> situation around the JTS license. I remember that the Lucene project
>> voted
>>> not to include the JTS dependencies due to its LGPL license. Is that not
>> an
>>> issue anymore? Is there a different situation for the Jena project?