geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jay D. McHugh" <...@jnwd.net>
Subject Re: Inclusion of MySQL in roller-mysql-database plugin
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:07:17 GMT
Hello all,

It looks like MySQL has specifically granted an exception to their usual 
GPL license requirement for a list of FLOSS licenses - ASF 2.0 included:
http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/foss-exception.html

In fact, the Apache Portable Runtime library is the only specifically 
listed library/package listed on that exclusion page.

So I think we could distribute the roller-mysql-database plugin if we 
wanted to - there is already a precedent at the ASF.

Or, could we change the way that the plugin is built so that it just has 
a dependency on a MySQL driver being loaded in the repository?  That 
way, we could give a fairly simple set of instructions on downloading 
the library from MySQL and loading the jar files into the repository 
before trying to load the plugin.  In my personal setup, I already had a 
MySQL driver loaded - having one bundled just means that now I have two.

I haven't played with creating any plugins yet, so I don't know if the 
system we have now allows for creating a plugin that doesn't bundle in 
the dependencies.  Is that something that can be done?

If we can build plugins that do not necessarily bundle in the 
dependencies then I think that would be the best way of handling plugins 
that would bring up licensing questions.  If we cannot, then it looks 
like we will need to put some procedure in place to review plugins that 
include third party code before they can be hosted by us.

Jay

Kevan Miller wrote:
> All,
> I created a Jira to handle licensing issues involving the inclusion of 
> MySQL in the roller-mysql-database plugin. See 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3816
> 
> I've insured that we will no longer build the roller-mysql-database 
> plugin in our source code. However, there are multiple ways of handling 
> this problem. Would like to hear opinions from the project. Ultimately, 
> it's the PMC's responsibility to oversee the licensing of our 
> distributions and to oversee the way we handle dependencies on artifacts 
> that are covered by excluded licenses.
> 
> The ASF Licensing Policy (currently it's a draft policy, but I think we 
> should be following the guidelines documented there) are located here -- 
> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
> 
> Discussion of how to handle Prohibited Works is here -- 
> http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html#options
> 
> Would be good for the project (in particular PMC) members to be familiar 
> with these issues. Would like to hear how we think we should address 
> this issue. As long as I feel the PMC is providing appropriate 
> oversight, I'm happy with what ever decision we reach.
> 
> --kevan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



Mime
View raw message