Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39001 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2009 05:34:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Aug 2009 05:34:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 22795 invoked by uid 500); 10 Aug 2009 05:34:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 22697 invoked by uid 500); 10 Aug 2009 05:34:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 22687 invoked by uid 99); 10 Aug 2009 05:34:08 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:34:08 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.204 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.204] (HELO mail-yx0-f204.google.com) (209.85.210.204) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:33:58 +0000 Received: by yxe42 with SMTP id 42so3799195yxe.13 for ; Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:33:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ICSgCxM/9y/CDJA1rk/HBFSycBJ4OVf/cyHYwknk0Pg=; b=wGgwOeYylfG3TtOPuyQW8cA/KUeM9YOd4f0ROQMARAh0EWJqLbCasXIcslg2L1CpY8 BkC3BQo7khZJYAQPNwCzMQ4DgxDObyGMwf/2CCnbY2q8Zd8h9U7aRlnJhOh3NCtBPgAA pyioNrXE4b3hb1Cz97x2hBztiI8GFg31DsRrA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KXumQaG2QRqjPhXsB9wHt77ieibHow3JW/s4OIRih+XGyrbgZGfzRq3otd8U1AMhUx ZOoteV4VvN72vyOYGB+BoBx49yH0n0AtBYnVd5OM8VxcdTfGUusw0Fsbx4HYUzyfIpDq WEKpH/uQB15m9mh0i1Pfx0Vu+sMkePbXy0D1g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.163.8 with SMTP id l8mr2944782ane.192.1249882417671; Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:33:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1B94AFDC-F3FA-4CB2-89D5-388CC14C15B4@apache.org> References: <29420CCA-62BF-424E-A03D-6B376A0D91FF@apache.org> <6AD2E30B-3CBF-419E-9EE9-8F73160C8D91@apache.org> <621A0BE0-6458-48F0-80AC-8D701F5375D9@apache.org> <20090807052210.GB11188@tumbolia.org> <00D13141-2CEE-42B2-87CE-81FBA695E36C@apache.org> <20090808041705.GG23303@tumbolia.org> <1B94AFDC-F3FA-4CB2-89D5-388CC14C15B4@apache.org> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 01:33:37 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Apache Maven/Maven repo (Re: Dependencies in SVN) From: Paul Davis To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > The ASF develops and distributes code licensed under the ASL. =A0An ASF > project can depend on software written on other licenses, but distributin= g > or developing software under different licenses is somewhere between > atypical and prohibited. =A0I think any exception would have to be grante= d by > the board. I've never seen anything when reading through the ASF docs on licensing that would indicate including external dependencies is 'somewhere between atypical and prohibited'. Links [1-3] that describe the general intent and some specifics on license compatibility never seem to mention in either direction what can or can not be included in SVN. Links [4-5] are both discussions on legal-discuss about including non-ASL compatible code in SVN to which the answer is somewhat hazy which I find quite surprising if including ASL-compatible code is atypical or prohibited. And to keeping these specifics in the distribution, each dependency is under a Class A compatible license which by reading [2] and [3] to lead me to believe that they are all completely kosher. Quoting from [6] which was the thread you started on incubator-general@ Niclas Hedhman wrote in response to you: > 2. Speaking from a legal perspective, there is nothing "at Apache" that > prevents people for doing source code copy, in small or large (a.k.a fork= s), > PROVIDED that the license allows it. I saw you mentioning BSD (modified I > hope) and MIT X, and those licenses require attribution and few other > things, so if that is done, there is no legal contention here. Now you sa= id > that Apache doesn't fork... well the reason behind that (I think) is that= we > are all lazy, it takes a lot of energy to maintain forks. And we don't do= it > to compete with the original project, out of courtesy... is that your > complaint? which would also lend to my interpretation so far that there is nothing wrong with including the dependencies. But perhaps I've missed something. If you could provide me a link to an email discussion or something in the legal documentation that would help me understand what the underlying issues are I would be most grateful. [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html [2] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html [3] http://www.apache.org/legal/ramblings.html [4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200904.mbox/= %3c168ef9ac0904160819v155e440j12d802ae749a315@mail.gmail.com%3e [5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200812.mbox/= %3c2d12b2f00812261045k644cdd04ub94ca52bf5d0b77e@mail.gmail.com%3e [6] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200908.mbox/= %3ccaf30e2a0908090354t616809fcu9d59858e59a47918@mail.gmail.com%3e HTH, Paul J. Davis