GPL code in bluesky

[bill stoddard <bi...@wstoddard.com>]

Bluesky Team
I had the great opportunity and honor to meet many of you face to face 
at Xi'an Jiao Tong University in June. At that time, we discussed the 
GPL/LGPL issue and Ting and and Hai Peng understood that the ASF cannot 
distribute GPL/LGPL code.  We also discussed the difference between the 
LGPL and GPL.. that it was permissible for code hosted at the ASF to 
dynamically link into LGPL code but that it was not acceptable to static 
link into LGPL or link, either dynamically or statically, to GPL code.  
The resolution, as I recall, was that it was possible to completely 
isolate the GPL/LGPL dependencies in the bluesky code from the rest of 
the code base.  Is that not the case? What has changed?

It appears that the code recently checked into the bluesky repository 
contains GPL/LGPL code.  That is unacceptable.   I will be requesting 
the infrastructure team to shut down further commits to the repository 
until the incubator PMC is satisfied that the team understands the 
sensitivity of the license issue.

Bill

 

Re: GPL code in bluesky

["du.haipeng" <du...@gmail.com>]

We have removed all our code from svn.

We are clear that GPLed code can't be included and LGPLed code can only be dynamically linked to. We have checked our code and shielded some part that are related to GPL.

It is the first time we face this kind of thing.Maybe we are not carefull enough and in a hurry.

We will wait until we are clear and communicate more.



du.haipeng
2008-07-15



发件人： bill stoddard
发送时间： 2008-07-15 07:36:41
收件人： bluesky-dev@incubator.apache.org
抄送： 
主题： GPL code in bluesky

Bluesky Team
I had the great opportunity and honor to meet many of you face to face 
at Xi'an Jiao Tong University in June. At that time, we discussed the 
GPL/LGPL issue and Ting and and Hai Peng understood that the ASF cannot 
distribute GPL/LGPL code.  We also discussed the difference between the 
LGPL and GPL.. that it was permissible for code hosted at the ASF to 
dynamically link into LGPL code but that it was not acceptable to static 
link into LGPL or link, either dynamically or statically, to GPL code.  
The resolution, as I recall, was that it was possible to completely 
isolate the GPL/LGPL dependencies in the bluesky code from the rest of 
the code base.  Is that not the case? What has changed?

It appears that the code recently checked into the bluesky repository 
contains GPL/LGPL code.  That is unacceptable.   I will be requesting 
the infrastructure team to shut down further commits to the repository 
until the incubator PMC is satisfied that the team understands the 
sensitivity of the license issue.

Bill