incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Clarification on treatment of "weak copyleft" components
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:08:24 GMT
One last question, based on OpenOffice 3rd party dependencies.

We have a good number of MPL dependencies.  I'm trying, with some
difficulty, to interpret what we can do based on the description here:

How does this fit into a release strategy that has both source and
binary releases.  Is this the idea:

1) Source releases would include binary object files/libraries for
these 3rd party components, but not their source.

2) Binary releases could link into such objects/libraries.

3) We give proper notices

4) Downstream consumer would need to make extra effort to retrieve and
modify the source of the MPL components, since we're not including the

Is that the idea?

Now, for our SVN, we need to host the actual source of the MPL
components, since we need to build the binaries on the platforms that
we support.  And in several cases we have patches the original source.
 Is this a problem?

One party that is left out in this scenario is the downstream consumer
who wishes to port AOOo to another platform.  They would not receive
the source to the MPL components.  And if they downloaded the original
source from the original OSS project, it would lack our patches.  So
they only thing they can do is download from our SVN (or from
Apache-Extras if we decide to do that).

(Or back to an earlier note, is there any problem with having the
build script automatically download such 3rd party dependencies?)

Any suggestions?

Note that in some cases, these dependencies have no reasonable
alternatives.  For example, if we want to integrate with Mozilla's
address book for supporting mail merging in memos, then we need to use
the interface that Mozilla has defined, with the library they provide,
which is naturally MPL.


View raw message