Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rabastus@gmail.com designates
 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender)
References: <1322159900.7244.YahooMailClassic@web113506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
From: Rob Weir <rabastus@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1322159900.7244.YahooMailClassic@web113506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 13:46:38 -0500
Message-ID: <603199634048133110@unknownmsgid>
Subject: Re: GPL'd dictionaries (was Re: ftp.services.openoffice.org?)
To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Nov 24, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@apache.org> wrote:

> Rob;
>
> --- On Thu, 11/24/11, Rob Weir <rabastus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Hi Ariel;
>>>
>>> If the comment on the Wiki has been approved by
>> Apache
>>> legal and not just an interpretation you guys are
>> right.
>>>
>>
>> Weak copy left (category-b) like MPL may be included in our
>> binary releases but not our source releases.   We can also
>> automate downloading the source for these modules as a non
>> default build option.
>>
> I conceded this a while ago, yes.
>
>> We are not required to move MPL code from SVN.
>
> Your ability to draw (wrong) conclusions according to
> what you want to do never ceases to amaze me (it was
> the same thing with dmake). If we can keep MPL code
> on SVN why not bring nss

Dmake is not MPL. And I've never commented on nss.

In any case the project is not going to grind to a halt every time you
are unsure. If you think we are doing something wrong then you need to
back that with some authority, a link to a policy statement or
authoritative interpretation. A number of us have already looked into
this deeply, discussed with mentors, etc on this list and on
legal-discuss. I don't expect that everyone followed all of the
discussions. But until you have, it us silly to suggest that we're
wrong.

-Rob


>
> Pedro.
>
>> But we should be
>> removing GPL code since we cannot distribute that in source
>> or binary releases.
>>
>>
>>> I tend to be pretty strict in this type of issues so
>>> please excuse me for scaring you all ;-).
>>>
>>> Pedro.
>>>
>>> --- On Thu, 11/24/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile <arielch@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 06:29:42AM
>>>> -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>> Hunspell is still the main spellchecker in AOO
>> but we
>>>>> cannot ship the italian dictionary and even
>> the MPL
>>>>> dictionaries have to be removed from the
>> repository.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly, what do you mean by saying "You
>> can go
>>>> ahead and
>>>>>> kill hunspell from the tree"?
>>>>>>
>>>>> We are not allowed to ship copyleft (strong or
>> weak)
>>>> in
>>>>> source releases so the same rules about not
>>>> download+patching
>>>>> copyleft apply to hunspell.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless I misunderstood something?
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/OOOUSERS/ipclearance.html
>>>> Task 1: Clarify legal usage of Category B (eg
>> MPL)
>>>> libraries
>>>>
>>>> Binary builds of libraries can be shipped with
>> binary
>>>> release of AOO.
>>>> Source code of libraries can remain on an Apache
>> server but
>>>> (like
>>>> ext_sources of old OOo.)
>>>> BUT
>>>> *  source code of libraries is not shipped in
>> a source
>>>> release of AOO
>>>> *  instead it can be downloaded and built
>> during
>>>> bootstrap, but only when
>>>>     developer uses a configure option
>> that is
>>>> off by default
>>>>
>>>> [end of quote]
>>>>
>>>> that's why rev. 1204995
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1204995
>>>> introduces:
>>>> --enable-hunspell - off by default
>>>> --enable-hyphen   - off by default
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Category B sources are not included
>>>> * Using system/building Category B libraries is
>> off by
>>>> default
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> --
>>>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>>>> La Plata, Argentina
>>>>
>>