commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [CODEC] Beider Morse Phonetic Matching Bug and questions
Date Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:08:16 GMT
I would think we want the trail to be public to show that we indeed have
the proper license with proper provenance. What privacy issue? Why should
this not be transparent process?

Gary


On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Thomas Neidhart <thomas.neidhart@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> to preserve privacy as this is a public mailinglist, could you please
> forward the relevant email thread to private@commons.apache.org ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Michael Tobias <michael@tobias.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Steve Morse has supplied me with an email trail from May 2011 where both
> > he and Alexander Beider give their permission to the developer who ported
> > the code from php to java to allow the algorithm to be licensed under the
> > Apache 2 open-source license.
> >
> > I can post the thread here or submit it privately - your call.
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gary Gregory [mailto:garydgregory@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 11 June 2014 16:39
> > To: Commons Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [CODEC] Beider Morse Phonetic Matching Bug and questions
> >
> > I can but it won't be for s couple of hours...
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Thomas
Neidhart <
> > thomas.neidhart@gmail.com> </div><div>Date:06/11/2014  11:16
>  (GMT-05:00)
> > </div><div>To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> > </div><div>Subject: Re: [CODEC] Beider Morse Phonetic Matching Bug and
> > questions </div><div> </div>He stated several times that the contributed
> > code is a port from php, but it looks like that everybody assumed he was
> > the copyright owner of the php code (which he obviously isn't).
> >
> > It is important to add links (e.g. papers or reference implementations)
> > for such code / algorithms, especially in the case of ported code.
> > Not only to have a clear trace of the license situation but also to be
> > able to backport changes/fixes from the original source.
> >
> > Regarding the re-licensing of the original source:
> >
> > I hope the authors agree, but usually there is a reason why code is
> > published under GPL rather than BSD/MIT/Apache style licenses.
> > An option would be to explicitly grant the ASF the permission to use
> their
> > code (including the rule files) so that they do not have to re-publish
> > their own code.
> >
> > Regarding a clean-room implementation: I do not think this is feasible,
> as
> > the core of the algorithm are the associated rule files which also do not
> > appear in the paper itself.
> >
> > As the maintainer of codec, do you want to contact the authors about this
> > issue?
> >
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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