incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard E. Breed IV" <whitehous...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Hunspell and MPL license
Date Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:41:20 GMT
Hey folks...a friend used my laptop, and I am getting tons of emails I do not understand from
a really smart & interesting group of folks...but, I need to unsubscribe and there's no
such button at the bottom, can you help?

THanks..chard

Richard Edwards Breed IV

--- On Tue, 7/19/11, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:

From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com>
Subject: Re: Hunspell and MPL license
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2011, 6:29 PM

On 19 July 2011 19:41, Eike Rathke <ooo@erack.de> wrote:
> I was digging a bit into 3rd party licenses for the Hunspell issue and
> came across Category B: Reciprocal Licenses in
> http://apache.org/legal/3party.html and noted that Hunspell is
> tri-licensed also under MPL 1.1 that would be permissive as long as the
> code is distributed only in binary form and the NOTICE file labels its
> reciprocity, if I understood correctly.

Good find. You do understand correctly. Although please note that the
page you link to is an earlier draft kept for reference only. The
official document is linked from the header of that page and can be
found at http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html (specifically for MPL
you need http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b )

Ross

>
> Currently OOo needs Hunspell in source code form only because very few
> patches are applied to be able to build it on Solaris, Windows and
> MingW, and one patch against a stack smasher. Am I right in assuming
> that if Hunspell adapted the upstream version such that these patches
> were superfluous, then AOOo would be able to build against a system
> Hunspell or on systems where Hunspell is not available or for binary
> distributions a build could include a binary of the library if the
> proper NOTICE entry is provided? To me this sounds like a solution to
> the problem.
>
>  Eike
>
> --
>  PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication.
>  Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C60 CE41 0149 0DB3  9E96 2F1A D073 293C 05FD
>



-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message