incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andre Fischer>
Subject Re: PROPOSAL (was Re: Category-B tarballs in SVN )
Date Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:37:47 GMT
On 13.01.2012 21:27, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello fellow indians; ;)
> I think there is consensus that this is (at least)
> a gray area so I have the following proposal, which
> shouldn't get in the way of having this properly
> solved by legal but which I think should solve at
> least temporarily the issues that we have. It's
> actually very simple but who knows, maybe it's even
> acceptable as a general incubator policy at the ASF.
> The ext_source in shall be divided, according to
> the categories of the licenses, into two
> directories in SVN, namely:
> ext_source_A
> ext_source_B

main/ooo.lst already offers a poor-mans version of this.  It has to 
sections headed with comments

# Libraries with category A license


# Libraries with category B license

which reference the tar balls in ext_sources/ that have, surprise, 
category A or category B license.

> - Ext_source_B shall have a prominent text note that warns
> users that the code there is made available only for
> builder convenience but that the code is in general
> not acceptable for inclusion in Apache source code
> releases.
> - It is understood that ext_source_B is a quarantine
> area. The idea is that the code we have there will
> only shrink with time. The code there can be updated
> for security reasons but in general no new code should
> be brought in without specific consensus (voting, checking
> with the PPMC, etc, but not lazy consensus).

This, I think, is an important point. Discourage people from adding more 
cat-B tar-balls, and encourage developers to replace the existing ones 
with category-A libraries.

We can start a Wiki page for the replacement tasks.  I think some time 
back you mentioned a possible replacement of rhino with V8.


> NOTE: Consensus for replacing standard OOo 3.4
> functionality like the CoinMP solver code is a given
> (particularly as the licensing is being worked on) but
> we don't want this to be a loophole to bring in MPL'd
> code into AOO.
> Of course we still have to comply with the standard
> Apache policies concerning Category-B : "Code that is
> more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed
> at runtime in source form may only be distributed in
> binary form." but at least now it should be pretty clear
> and easy for everyone downloading the code from SVN where
> they can expect licensing issues.
> Pedro.

View raw message