httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Behlendorf <br...@apache.org>
Subject Zlib license/Apache license.
Date Sun, 17 Oct 1999 01:56:49 GMT
On Fri, 15 Oct 1999 TOKILEY@aol.com wrote:
> What I still have not heard or seen
> that would be really helpful is a
> a straight admission from ASF representative
> that any patches containing most, if not all,
> of the ZLIB code would be readily accepted by
> the Apache Group/ASF. Yea or nay?

I don't see any encumbrance to doing so.  The license seems completely
compatible, very similat to other packages we've integrated into Apache,
like Henry Spencer's regex package.  The usual course of events is to
contact the authors to make sure there are no other issues they might
have, and ideally, to have the authors of that code assign it to
the ASF for completeness.

The "ASF" doesn't make decisions about what patches are accepted - that's
for each project to work out on their own.  The license won't be a hurdle,
is all I can say.  

> The reason I was assuming ZLIB is under the
> GNU public license is that despite what
> they say about it they freely admit it
> is 'derived' from 'gzip' ( Which it just
> so happens was written by the same 2 people
> so it's hard to imagine it is not based on gzip').

A copyright holder can *always* license their works under multiple
licenses.  So there is no inconsistancy as far as I can tell.

> There is no question that deflate ( base for gzip and zlib )
> is itself based on a Huffman pass and some LZ77. 

If we get to the point that we have actual patches for submission that may
be suspect, then we can ask any related patent holders if they wish to
make a claim on the code in question.  If so, then we can have the debate
about whether having patented algorithms (with the blessing of the patent
holder) in Apache is a good thing or a bad thing.  But not before.

	Brian



Mime
View raw message