www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <...@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Subject Re: Need advice on accepting a particular patch
Date Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:51:26 GMT
Thanks for all the answers so far, everyone!

On 23.12.2005 10:19:10 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 December 2005 09:43, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> 
> > You can doublecheck with Cliff, but since the thing is published under
> > ALv2, I believe that yes, you can use the code.
> 
> The scenario painted involves making the code part of the ASF maintained 
> codebase. Why would this case be any different from adding a whole ALv2 
> licensed library of code into a project, which AFAICT requires vetting and 
> other processes thorugh the Incubator?

I thought some more about this. I think it depends whether we're talking
about source code (as in this example) or just an external library
(binary). Until recently, I was under the impression that source (!) code
that does not contain the ASF ALv2 header is not supposed to be in the
ASF's repository. But there are W3C-licensed sources in XML Commons
Externals and Apache Batik (the latter will move to the former before
its next release). And I recently learned that HTTPD contains several
classes that are not bearing the ASF ALv2 header. I think it was mainly
the Java land here in the ASF where non-ASF-owned code was not supposed to
be placed in SVN. Or at least that's what I thought the whole time. XML
Commons Externals was some kind of an exception, but at least it is
carefully separated from other packages. Then I realized we had similar
W3C licensed sources in Batik...

Anyway, for the Java world it's relatively easy to simply work with
binaries (JAR files) to handle external code, although it wouldn't work
in my particular case here. For C/C++ programs this is a lot more
complicated because there are no portable binaries (unless it's managed
.NET code).

So, Noel seems to suggest to go down the route HTTPD has taken.

> To me, it seems that the legal requirements are not clear enough and we try to 
> be pragmatic about it. This leads to a "soft environment" that is up to 
> interpretation. 
> Jeremias is probably expressing that programmers like solid rules and expected 
> behaviours around themselves.

Yes. The recent survey Cliff sent to the PMCs was very highly
appreciated (at least by me) because it shows that steps in the right
direction are underway.




Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only.  Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF.  See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message