incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Moving ext_src to Apache
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:59:05 GMT

--- On Mon, 10/31/11, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
...
> > (2) Weak Copyleft license
> >
> > It seems as if we want to keep at least HunSpell,
> maybe more, and
> > according to the Apache rules we must deliver them as
> binaries in our
> > source tree. As we don't take these binaries from the
> original projects
> > as they are (for several reasons), we must build them
> from the sources
> > ourselves and that must happen somewhere outside of
> the "regular" OOo
> > build. We already do that with the "mozilla" module if
> the
> 
> I don't believe that there is any requirement to place
> these modules outside of the Apache SVN.  The requirement
> is around *releases*, not *builds*.  We cannot include the
> source of weak copyleft components in our releases.  But we
> can host them in SVN.
> 
> In general, I don't think that there is any real advantage,
> in terms of Apache license and release policy, of moving
> code to Apache Extras.

Hmm.. we are talking about mozilla and hunspell, right?
I don't see any advantage in attempting to maintain that
stuff in-house. If someone is going to maintain that, I
won't object but at least for FreeBSD we will be using
the available binaries which are pretty well maintained,
specially concerning security issues.

Once the headers are changed, one thing that we do need
to maintain in Apache Extras is the reportbuilder module
and all it's dependencies. Those are all GPLd and there
doesn't seem to be any possible replacement.

Pedro.

Mime
View raw message