harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <m...@leosimons.com>
Subject Re: [Licensing] Fresh start
Date Sun, 04 Dec 2005 19:15:42 GMT
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 01:50:35PM -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Just remember, it has to go both ways :)

Baby steps :-)

> Apache code in classpath and
> classpath code in Harmony. We can't just push things so that it is a
> one way street. So far what i have not heard is how/what can be done
> to enable Classpath to use the tons of jakarta code and other Apache
> code.

there's been several options discussed, actually. They just look very
"expensive" or not without problems. Eg

-> change the Apache License to be GPL-compatible
-> write a GPL-compatible interface into which you can plug Apache
   licensed code
-> hope that GPLv3 is GPL-compatible
-> change the Classpath license to be AL-compatible (not feasible since
   it makes classpath incompatible with other parties)

> How about a plan of attack?

Is always good!

> Anthony, Dalibor and Mark can try hard to
> lobby FSF's GPL v3 effort to be as compatible as possible with ASL
> 2.0?

Actually, anyone and everyone can and should do that, since the FSF is going
to be following a very open process to GPL v3. We should all chime in!

> In the mean while, we can take up Stefano's offer of working on a
> VM interface.

I am not so sure that's a good idea, or whether its feasible. Not saying
its a bad idea though.

Mark told me someone tried something like that a year or two ago already.
I forgot whom or what it was called, but I'd suggest trying to learn about
it and if it failed, why.

> If we get thru in one piece till GPL v3 gets out, then
> we can investigate if Classpath can switch to use Xerces/Xalan etc
> from Apache.

s/switch/provide an option/.

> In the parallel, let's see how LGPL bridge policy works
> in the real world usage (once Apache-Legal formulates it and announces
> it). At that point we can eval options on both sides and see how best
> to go forward.

yup. With you there.

> Stating the obvious, since none of the legal stuff is driven by anyone
> on this list,

Actually, I think there's several people here driving it. I'm trying :-)

> we should move forward with technical solutions...stuff
> that geir has always pushed for.
> Is there a better plan of attack?

I think that these things can and should happen in parallel. Technical
stuff is good. By all means. We shouldn't be waiting with technical stuff
because of "legal hope".


View raw message