incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <>
Subject Re: [RELEASE] NOTICE and LICENSE file
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:23:15 GMT

Excuse me I don't really want to be involved in this discussion.
I am simply tired of looking those files!

However.. just my $0.02.

On 03/28/12 04:18, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> Hi
> ...
> There is already feedback on legal-discuss regarding my post.
> A short summary:
> - It seems that LICENSE file and NOTICE file of integrated Apache 
> projects as 3rd party components need to be considered. E.g. Apache APR
> - It seems that notices of 3rd party components which are licensed 
> under the Apache license need to be considered. E.g. serf
> - For our planned binary packages the bundled dictionary extensions 
> need to be considered.
> If you are interested in further details you may have a look at 

The thread and particualrly Marvin Humphrey's first reply are very 
  but I don't agree with your summary.

It is clear to me that the NOTICE file has only to purposes:

1. To cover for the advertisement clause the classic BSD licenses and 
ASL (1-1.1).
2. To inform about probable patent issues.

The above two things are typically the things that make software GPL 

My conclusions are:

(1) We are carrying way too much information in our NOTICE and LICENSE 

(2) The mere existance of a LICENSE file would indicate we cannot comply 
the GPL. The GPL, however only applies to distribution not to use.

I think to be consistent with (2) we cannot carry GPL notices, plus 
those are not
shipped always. I think the way around that is add a general disclaimer note
about "alien" extensions that may be included in a binary package that 
are under
an independent license but don't constitute derived works.

> Thus, I will continue my work on this task:
> - First I will create a LICENSE file and a NOTICE file for the source 
> package of our release. These will be the files trunk/main/LICENSE and 
> trunk/main/NOTICE
This must be stripped, Please note that we already carry information 
about other
Apache Projects like Tomcat and Commons in our NOTICE file. The AL2 doesn't
have an advertisement clause, so I think almost everything there should 
go except
for OpenSSL and maybe the ICC stuff and the Adobe stuff.

> - Then I will create a LICENSE file and a NOTICE file for the binary 
> packages of our release. I will name them 
> trunk/main/LICENSE-binary-package and trunk/main/NOTICE-binary-package

You can call make LICENSE addendums but then those vary with the specific
dictionaries bundled. In the thread there is uncertainty if we should 
such thing in LICENSE or if we should just note them prominently in the
extensions themselves.



I think
> Best regards, Oliver.

View raw message