You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> on 2013/04/21 10:58:41 UTC
New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
As you can see in
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/
the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
the licenses is MPLv2.
Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org>wrote:
> @Rob,
>
> Thanks.
>
> That is a great summary of what is involved.
>
> I am curious, in the case of libwpd, how binaries would be obtained and
> what the inclusion mechanism would be. E.g., would there be shared
> libraries/DLLs built from unmodified external sources as part of the AOO
> build?
>
>
We wouldn't include it at all in our source distribution, not in source
form, not in binary form. The legal page you referenced did not say that
we must include binaries. It only said that at most we could include the
code in binary form in the release.
You can look at how we handle analogous things in AOO today, e.g.,
Hunspell, and search the list archives, on this list and legal-discuss,
for the voluminous prior discussions on this topic.
-Rob
> I assume unmodified header files (and library definitions) for access to
> the APIs of the libraries would be relied upon in a similar fashion during
> AOO (incremental) builds.
>
> Is that a reasonable sketch of how step (4) is accomplished in this case?
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 08:11
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; <or...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
>
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orcmid@apache.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Licensing issues have not been entirely removed,
> > <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>.
> >
> > Code with Category B MPL license is accepted in ASF projects under very
> > specific restrictions. Having to build the code from source, especially
> > with modifications, is problematic.
> >
> >
>
> Yes, and several of us are very, very familiar with these restrictions. We
> have a good model to follow, based on past practice:
>
> 1) Don't put the code in our SVN
>
> 2) Use it only for optional features
>
> 3) Source distribution does not include the source
>
> 4) May include binaries with our binary distributions
>
> 5) Need to update license file for binary distribution
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > - Dennis
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
> > Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 01:59
> > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> > Subject: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
> >
> > As you can see in
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/
> >
> > the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> > Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
> > the licenses is MPLv2.
> >
> > Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
> > do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> > incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
RE: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>.
@Rob,
Thanks.
That is a great summary of what is involved.
I am curious, in the case of libwpd, how binaries would be obtained and what the inclusion mechanism would be. E.g., would there be shared libraries/DLLs built from unmodified external sources as part of the AOO build?
I assume unmodified header files (and library definitions) for access to the APIs of the libraries would be relied upon in a similar fashion during AOO (incremental) builds.
Is that a reasonable sketch of how step (4) is accomplished in this case?
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 08:11
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; <or...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org>wrote:
> Licensing issues have not been entirely removed,
> <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>.
>
> Code with Category B MPL license is accepted in ASF projects under very
> specific restrictions. Having to build the code from source, especially
> with modifications, is problematic.
>
>
Yes, and several of us are very, very familiar with these restrictions. We
have a good model to follow, based on past practice:
1) Don't put the code in our SVN
2) Use it only for optional features
3) Source distribution does not include the source
4) May include binaries with our binary distributions
5) Need to update license file for binary distribution
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 01:59
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
>
> As you can see in
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/
>
> the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
> the licenses is MPLv2.
>
> Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
> do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <or...@apache.org>wrote:
> Licensing issues have not been entirely removed,
> <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>.
>
> Code with Category B MPL license is accepted in ASF projects under very
> specific restrictions. Having to build the code from source, especially
> with modifications, is problematic.
>
>
Yes, and several of us are very, very familiar with these restrictions. We
have a good model to follow, based on past practice:
1) Don't put the code in our SVN
2) Use it only for optional features
3) Source distribution does not include the source
4) May include binaries with our binary distributions
5) Need to update license file for binary distribution
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 01:59
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
>
> As you can see in
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/
>
> the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
> the licenses is MPLv2.
>
> Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
> do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
RE: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <or...@apache.org>.
Licensing issues have not been entirely removed,
<http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>.
Code with Category B MPL license is accepted in ASF projects under very specific restrictions. Having to build the code from source, especially with modifications, is problematic.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pescetti@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 01:59
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
As you can see in
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/
the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
the licenses is MPLv2.
Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 9:25 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2013 2:15 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> > > As you can see in
> > > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/**libwpd-0.9.7/<
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/>
> > > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwps/files/libwps/**libwps-0.2.8/<
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/>
> > > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/**libwpg-0.2.2/<
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/>
> > >
> > > the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> > > Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one
> of
> > > the licenses is MPLv2.
> > >
> > > Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish
> to
> > > do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> > > incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
> > >
> > >
> > If we do we'll need to be careful that we don't reintroduce this issue:
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-2149.html
> >
> > Security team has the details.
>
> I have heard several times, that we have a security team, but apart from a
> couple of very old mail threads they seem to be invisible. As I deal with
> security issues at least once a week it would be nice to have the members
> on a public list. I apologize in advance if the list exist and I just
> missed it.
>
>
Due to the nature of their work the security team works on a private list.
There is an ASF security team, info here:
http://www.apache.org/security/
They then coordinate with project-specific security teams. Some projects
just use their private PMC lists for this work. Some (like AOO) have a
dedicated private list, self-selected from the PMC. Our page is here:
http://openoffice.apache.org/security.html
Note: these security lists are generally for reviewing and resolving
reported vulnerabilities in our software and preparing CVE reports.
Typically a security researcher will find a vulnerability, report to it the
vendor, and give the vendor an opportunity to fix the problem before they
go public. This is a practice called "responsible disclosure". On the AOO
security list we don't discuss issues related to our servers. If we did
get such a report we'd go directly to infrastructure-private@.
Hopefully that clears up what the security team does. Maybe for what
you're looking for a public admin@openoffice.apache.org list would be good?
Regards,
-Rob
It would also be nice to know the charter of the team, does it include
> download, wiki etc.
>
> rgds
> jan I
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Andrea.
> > >
> > >
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On Apr 21, 2013 2:15 PM, "Rob Weir" <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org
>wrote:
>
> > As you can see in
> > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/**libwpd-0.9.7/<
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/>
> > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwps/files/libwps/**libwps-0.2.8/<
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/>
> > http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/**libwpg-0.2.2/<
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/>
> >
> > the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> > Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
> > the licenses is MPLv2.
> >
> > Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
> > do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> > incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
> >
> >
> If we do we'll need to be careful that we don't reintroduce this issue:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-2149.html
>
> Security team has the details.
I have heard several times, that we have a security team, but apart from a
couple of very old mail threads they seem to be invisible. As I deal with
security issues at least once a week it would be nice to have the members
on a public list. I apologize in advance if the list exist and I just
missed it.
It would also be nice to know the charter of the team, does it include
download, wiki etc.
rgds
jan I
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
> >
> >
------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
Re: New license for libwpd, libwps, libwpg
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>wrote:
> As you can see in
> http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/**libwpd-0.9.7/<http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpd/files/libwpd/libwpd-0.9.7/>
> http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwps/files/libwps/**libwps-0.2.8/<http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwps/files/libwps/libwps-0.2.8/>
> http://sourceforge.net/**projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/**libwpg-0.2.2/<http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg/files/libwpg/libwpg-0.2.2/>
>
> the three libraries that OpenOffice was using to import WordPerfect, MS
> Works and WordPerfect Graphics files have now been dual-licensed; one of
> the licenses is MPLv2.
>
> Does this mean that we can include them back in OpenOffice if we wish to
> do so? If I recalled correctly, they were removed as of 3.4.0 due to
> incompatible licensing. Any reasons for/against including them now?
>
>
If we do we'll need to be careful that we don't reintroduce this issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/security/cves/CVE-2012-2149.html
Security team has the details.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>