incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite (Incubating) 1.0-RC3
Date Sun, 22 Mar 2015 05:01:25 GMT
On 22.03.2015 00:02, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
> <dsetrakyan@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Is this GPL software bundled or required?
>>> ./modules/core/src/main/resources/META-INF/licenses/gnu-gplv2ce-license.txt
>>> ./modules/geospatial/licenses/jts-lgpl-license.txt
>>> ./modules/hibernate/licenses/hibernate-lgpl-2.1-license.txt
>>> ./modules/schedule/licenses/cron4j-lgpl-2.1-license.txt
>>>
>> These are optional runtime dependencies (GPL code is not present in the
>> Apache Ignite source tree). The license text is provided on per-dependency
>> basis to let the user know that if he/she chooses to include the
>> dependency, then it will be under the specified license.
> I think whether that's OK is going to depend on how the Ignite code interfaces
> with any GPL code.  If it's going through a generalization layer a la JDBC
> which just happens to be implemented by GPL code, that might be OK.  If Ignite
> is implementing against a GPL-only interface, probably not OK even though the
> dependency is optional.  I think it would be best to pursue the matter
> further, either on the podling list, here, or on legal-discuss@apache.  Here's
> some prior discussion:
>
> http://apache.markmail.org/thread/i6uzkkyibxx7bniv

http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html says, on the topic of GPL and
similar:

    Apache projects cannot distribute any such components. However, if
    the component is only needed for optional features, a project can
    provide the user with instructions on how to obtain and install the
    non-included work. Optional means that the component is not required
    for standard use of the product or for the product to achieve a
    desirable level of quality.


Given the above, why are we still discussing this? Those are optional
components. Ignite works just fine without them.

When Subversion was incubating, 5 or so years ago, we went through the
same discussion regarding our dependency on Neon, even though it was
optional and Subversion works fine without any DAV plugin at all.
Subversion graduated while still having this (optional) dependency.

If you want to question Ignite's optional dependency on GPL code, you
should start by changing the published policy and making all TLPs throw
out such dependencies.

Not gonna happen, right?

-- Brane


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message