incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: LGPL dependency
Date Mon, 01 Jul 2019 16:18:53 GMT
Myrle, did you get all you needed? Enough votes and all to get the release unblocked?

> On Jun 28, 2019, at 11:24 AM, Myrle Krantz <myrle@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I've said it on dev@weex, and on private@incubator, but I wanted to make
> sure and say it here too.  Weex should cut the release.  We'll figure out
> the rest later.  The straw poll on private@incubator also confirms: you
> have my support and the support of many of the mentors in the incubator.  I
> apologize for us blocking you for so long.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Myrle Krantz
> PMC Member, Apache Incubator
> 
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 6:06 AM 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> It looks like we have got result[1] from Legal VP, I will bring it here now
>> 
>>   1. It's fine if Weex only could include header files under 2-clause BSD
>>   license from Webkit at compiling time and has a dynamic link to
>> Webkit.so
>>   at runtime.
>>   2. It's recommended that excluding Webkit.so from Weex convenience
>>   library. Users would include the code snippet below to include both weex
>>   and webkit.
>> 
>> <dependency>
>> 
>>    <artifactId>weex_sdk</artifactId>
>> 
>> </dependency>
>> 
>> <dependency>
>> 
>>    <artifactId>webkit</artifactId>
>> 
>> </dependency>
>> 
>> 
>> The following is what I need to consult from Incubator:
>> 
>> Google will ban all apps without 64 bit published in Google Play from 1st,
>> August, 2019 [1]. Though it's a good idea of excluding Webkit.so from
>> convenience library of Weex, Weex community needs to publish next release
>> with 64-bit support ASAP to give users enough time to upgrade Weex. I'd
>> like to remain webkit.so in convenience library of Weex only for next
>> release.
>> 
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-464
>> [2] https://developer.android.com/distribute/best-practices/develop/64-bit
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> YorkShen
>> 
>> 申远
>> 
>> 
>> Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org> 于2019年6月24日周一 上午7:32写道:
>> 
>>> Lets continue this discussion on
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-464 please
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 2:18 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> WebKit dates back to KHTML, an LGPL web engine from KDE. It sounds like
>>>> it’s some WebKit specific files that are BSD licensed. I haven’t
>>> inspected
>>>> the individual files, but I suspect that the header files are BSD
>>> licensed
>>>> to make linking less of a legal headache.
>>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:11, Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The Webkit license page https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/ says
>>>>> portions licensed under LGPL and BSD licenses.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Usually this means it's the user's choice which license to use.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We would choose the BSD License for the components that we use.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you find anywhere a statement that the Webkit.so is licensed only
>>>>> under LGPL?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Craig
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:40 AM, 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As mentioned above, Webkit is under dual License(BSD and LPGL) and
>>> it's
>>>>>> almost impossible for us to figure out which function is a pure BSD
>>>>>> function. I don't know
>>>>>> Weex.apiA->Webkit.BSD.apiB->Webkit.BSD.apiC->Webkit.LGPL
will
>> happen
>>> or
>>>>>> not. Perhaps pure BSD header file will lead to pure BSD
>>> implementation.
>>>>>> Perhaps?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As for alternative dependency, it's possible if we make some major
>>>>> changes
>>>>>> to Weex. But convenience binary of each Weex release includes
>>> Webkit.so,
>>>>>> how to solve that problem? Maybe publish two convenience binary,
>> one
>>>>> named
>>>>>> Weex_WebKit.aar and the other named Weex_BSDKit.aar ? Not sounds
>>> like a
>>>>>> good idea to me.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> YorkShen
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 申远
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com> 于2019年6月14日周五
下午4:23写道:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi York
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am not a C/C++ coder, so I could be wrong.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But from I saw, Catalog X dependency required is not right. Like
>> Hen
>>>>> said,
>>>>>>> alternative is an option.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Such as
>>>>>>> Today’s another incubating project, ShardingSphere.
>>>>>>> When user wants to MySQL sharing, then they needs to accept MySQL
>>> Driver
>>>>>>> license first(or already accepted).
>>>>>>> But user could use ShardingSphere with PostgreSQL JDBC Driver.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sheng Wu
>>>>>>> Apache Skywalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 在 2019年6月14日,下午4:15,Hen <bayard@apache.org>
写道:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Assuming Weex requires Webkit and is unable to work with
an
>>>>> alternative,
>>>>>>>> the issue here is that users of Weex would seem to have to
permit
>>>>> reverse
>>>>>>>> engineering in their legal terms. Our position has been that
that
>>> goes
>>>>>>>> beyond the scope of the Apache 2.0 license and would be an
>>> unpleasant
>>>>>>>> surprise for users.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (seem to have to  =>  this is how we've discussed the
license; an
>>>>> actual
>>>>>>>> court may decide something completely different)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Looking at Weex's website's description, it does not seem
to be
>>> that a
>>>>>>> user
>>>>>>>> of Weex will already have agreed to the terms of Webkit;
thus I
>>> believe
>>>>>>>> they would be unpleasantly surprised.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hen
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:49 AM 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I am a PPMC member of Apache Weex. After serious reviewing
of
>> our
>>>>>>>>> dependencies, I found there some of the source code we
copied
>> from
>>>>>>> Webkit
>>>>>>>>> is actually under LGPL license(Category X) and our license
>> format
>>>>> tools
>>>>>>>>> changed the license header of these files to Apache v2
>>> incorrectly.
>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>> like to hear advice from incubator that whether our actions
>> below
>>>>> would
>>>>>>> fix
>>>>>>>>> the Category X issue.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> First of all, License for Webkit is complicated, as it's
said
>> that
>>>>>>> "WebKit
>>>>>>>>> is open source software with portions licensed under
the LGPL
>> and
>>> BSD
>>>>>>>>> licenses available here." [1].
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Now, Weex includes 1500 header files( .h files) from
Webkit at
>>>>> compiling
>>>>>>>>> stage and around 150 of the are under BSD License. At
runtime,
>>> Weex
>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>> dynamic links to the shared library of Webkit.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> After some major change, Weex could just include around
50
>>> headers(.h
>>>>>>>>> files) at compiling stage and all of them are under BSD
license.
>>> At
>>>>>>>>> runtime, Weex still needs to dynamic links to the shared
library
>>> of
>>>>>>> Webkit
>>>>>>>>> as before.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> As Webkit is under dual license, and it's almost impossible
for
>>> us to
>>>>>>>>> figure out whether there is an function call chain like
>>>>>>>>> Weex.apiA->Webkit.BSD.apiB->Webkit.BSD.apiC->Webkit.LGPL.apiD.
>> I'd
>>>>> like
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> know our proposed change is enough to fix the Category
X
>>> dependency.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>> YorkShen
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 申远
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Craig L Russell
>>>>> clr@apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 


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


Mime
View raw message