camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christoph Emmersberger <cemme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: camel-dropbox
Date Fri, 07 Mar 2014 12:29:23 GMT
+ 1 for handling it the proposed way.

I just checked the legal page of ASF [1] and figured that MIT license is basically compatible
with ASF 2.0 [2].

However the statement regarding MIT license is not 100% clear, since it is related to Ruby
Gems and ending with the following statement:

“... other licenses (such as MIT) may also be OK, depending on the license."

Therefore I would propose the following:

a) First, hand over the contribution on camel-extra
b) Get some clarification on licensing
c) If there is no licensing issue, we’ll handle it as we’ve done in the past and migrate
the component to ASF [3].

Best,

Christoph

[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#ruby-license
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-7090


On 07 Mar 2014, at 12:58, Pontus Ullgren <ullgren@gmail.com> wrote:

> In the the dropbox core API zip file there is a License.txt
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/developers/downloads/sdks/core/java/dropbox-java-sdk-1.7.6.zip
> ---
> Copyright (c) 2013 Dropbox Inc., http://www.dropbox.com/
> 
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
> a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
> "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
> without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
> distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to
> permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
> the following conditions:
> 
> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
> included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
> 
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
> EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
> MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
> NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE
> LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION
> OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION
> WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
> --
> 
> Why would this license stop the camel-dropbox component from beeing
> released under the Apache License ?
> To me the dropbox API license seems pretty permissive.
> 
> // Pontus
> 
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Henryk Konsek <hekonsek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> What I can not answer is, if the dropbox license and terms of conditions
>>> meet the general ASF requirements or not.
>> 
>> Apparently not.
>> 
>>> If it is not possible to contribute the component to the ASF branch, I would
>>> vote for a contribution to camel-extra.
>> 
>> I asked to author of the DropBox pull request if he would like to
>> contribute the project to Camel Extra.
>> 
>> Cheers.
>> 
>> --
>> Henryk Konsek
>> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com


Mime
View raw message