incubator-odf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Initial RAT results
Date Fri, 16 Sep 2011 22:16:20 GMT

On Sep 16, 2011, at 1:51 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> To see how much work we have on IP clearance, I ran RAT, with results here:
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/pmc/ip-clearance/rat.txt
> 
> Most of the issues flagged fall into these categories:
> 
> 1. Test documents, in ODF format.   I'm not sure what we can do about
> them.  We could put the license in the documents as metadata.  But RAT
> wouldn't know how to find the license in the metadata.  Of course, in
> the future RAT could be enhanced, to use the ODF Toolkit to find this
> license.  Or we could just treat test documents as binary files.
> 
> 2. Maven's pom.xml -- we could add license as an XML comment?

Yes, at the top.

David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:apache-poi dave$ cd maven
David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:maven dave$ ls
multisign.sh		ooxml-schemas.pom	poi-excelant.pom	poi-ooxml.pom		poi.pom
mvn-deploy.sh		poi-examples.pom	poi-ooxml-schemas.pom	poi-scratchpad.pom
David-Fishers-MacBook-Air:maven dave$ more *.pom
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!--

   Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
...

> 
> 3. ODF's schema files, in Relax NG format.  These are copyright by
> OASIS, the consortium where ODF is standardized.  The notice in the
> schema is shown here:
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/odf/trunk/generator/schema2template/src/main/resources/examples/odf/OpenDocument-v1.2-csprd03-schema.rng
> 
> This is used as input to the code generation, which is a build-time
> process that generates a portion of the Java code directly from the
> ODF schema.  So the schema definition document is not part of the
> runtime, though it would be part of our source code release.
> 
> Note that this schema definition is not under an open source software
> license, but it does have a license that allows unrestricted use,
> redistribution, etc. as well as creation of derived works.  But it
> does have a restriction on modifications.
> 
> I assume we'll need to take this to legal-discuss to get this classified.

Yes. Apache POI has a similar situation with the OOXML schemas. The jar with the generated
code is acknowledged with the following in the LICENSE

Office Open XML schemas (ooxml-schemas-1.0.jar)

    The Office Open XML schema definitions used by Apache POI are
    a part of the Office Open XML ECMA Specification (ECMA-376, [1]).
    As defined in section 9.4 of the ECMA bylaws [2], this specification
    is available to all interested parties without restriction:

        9.4 All documents when approved shall be made available to
            all interested parties without restriction.

    Furthermore, both Microsoft and Adobe have granted patent licenses
    to this work [3,4,5].

    [1] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-376.htm
    [2] http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/Ecmabylaws.htm
    [3] http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/
    [4] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma%20PATENT/ECMA-376%20Edition%201%20Microsoft%20Patent%20Declaration.pdf
    [5] http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/Ecma%20PATENT/ga-2006-191.pdf

(Oh and I found something to fix - it is now ooxml-schemas-1.1.jar!)

Regards,
Dave

> 4. Some configuration files, .properties, .vm, etc.  We should be able
> to add a license notice there.
> 
> 5. A few Java files that lack a license header.  I think we should
> check their history in Hg, and establish their provenance.
> 
> -Rob


Mime
View raw message