brooklyn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Downer <rich...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Third party dependencies
Date Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:39:01 GMT
Hi Thomas,

For Brooklyn itself, there are many rules based in copyright law and Apache
policy that affect how this is done. Essentially, if the licenses are
compatible, then there's no issue with bundling dependencies into the
project, provided that the bundled package is correctly attributed in the
right places. The gold reference document for Apache is at [1], and my
interpretation of how this specifically applies to Brooklyn is at [2].

However if you're writing an external library that is not part of Apache
Brooklyn - you are merely consuming Apache Brooklyn by dropping in an extra
library - then the Apache policies do not apply to you! You do still need
to consider copyright law however, so I advise that you let the Apache
policy 'inspire' you as it was written with compliance of the law a key
requirement :-)

I see that retrofit has an Apache license. This is a permissive (non-viral)
license so you're unlikely to have a problem with it, although it depends
on the license of your project.

In practical terms, yes, maven-shade-plugin will do the trick, and I think
maven-assembly-plugin can do it too. However you need to be aware that
these kinds of tools will invalidate signed JARs. In practice these are
rarely a problem - we have observed an issue where BouncyCastle is degraded
if it's not signed, but I've not seen any other kind of problem.

Personally, I don't really like shading, as it obscures transitive
dependencies. The technique taken by several projects is to physically copy
in the source code with a different package name (e.g.
com.example.myproject.com.google.common.collect.Iterables) and I think I
prefer that technique. It's just a gut feel though, I cannot provide any
facts to back it up :-)

Richard.

[1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
[2] https://brooklyn.incubator.apache.org/v/latest/dev/code/licensing.html

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 at 09:58 Thomas Bouron <thomas.bouron@cloudsoftcorp.com>
wrote:

> Hi devs.
>
> I'm currently working on a project for a client where I want to use this
> library[1] for all my REST call. It is released under the Apache licence
> v2.
>
> My project will be released as a jar and placed under the Brookyln's
> dropins folder but I rather have only one jar containing all my
> dependencies instead of adding my third party library jar one by one.
>
> Now I'm not sure if I can do that from a licensing point of view. Do you
> have any thoughts? Also, If there is no issue to do so, what is the best
> practice in that matter? Using the maven shade plugin?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best.
>
> [1] http://square.github.io/retrofit/
> --
> Thomas Bouron • Software Engineer @ Cloudsoft Corporation •
> http://www.cloudsoftcorp.com/
> Github: https://github.com/tbouron
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/eltibouron
>
> --
> Cloudsoft Corporation Limited, Registered in Scotland No: SC349230.
>  Registered Office: 13 Dryden Place, Edinburgh, EH9 1RP
>
> This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If
> the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return
> the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message
> from your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. Cloudsoft
> Corporation Limited does not accept responsibility for changes made to this
> message after it was sent.
>
> Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission of
> viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that the
> onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any attachments
> will not adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is
> accepted by Cloudsoft Corporation Limited in this regard and the recipient
> should carry out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message