www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Smiley, David W." <dsmi...@mitre.org>
Subject Re: Building ASL code requiring LGPL 3rd party
Date Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:44:07 GMT
Calm down Chris...  (any others reading, please hang in there; the last paragraph has the stuff
that is on-topic)

On Mar 30, 2011, at 2:11 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

>>> Yep this is my issue. 
>>> Even if there is some (set of) technicality (technicalities) that satisfies the
ASF policy, as a downstream consumer of the software, I'd be wary. Who knows how understanding
of any of these topics will change.
>> Chris, that "understanding" is precisely why I am asking on the Apache legal-discuss
list, here, instead of making decisions (not using JTS) based on fear/uncertainty/doubt (FUD).
 Surely we don't want to make decisions based on FUD.  Given that you incepted Apache SIS,
a new competitor to JTS, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.  But please don't continue to spread
> Given that you are desperately trying to get the Lucene/Solr community to accept your
patch, it's also not really a surprise that you continue to miss the point I'm trying to make
and try and point to names rather than address the topic.

If I missed your point, "the topic", then please tell me again? I'm definitely not trying
to avoid any points you have. 

And by "point to names" do you simply mean that I am impressed with Martin Davis's experience
behind JTS? So? That has nothing to do with my message on this legal-discuss list -- about
licensing.  *Can* we use JTS, not wether we should (i.e. vs SIS). That's for the Lucene/Solr
lists, not here. And besides I think it is clear that we *could* but the details of how to
do so in compliance with licenses/policy is what there was actual uncertainty about.

> SIS isn't a competitor to JTS you troll. It's a project to try and build open source
geospatial software under the Apache Software License. Not the *GPL.

Oops; I misunderstood!  If SIS is not going to have point-in-polygon detection or other similar
geospatial intersection code then please set me straight.  I really thought there was substantial
overlap. Of course few projects have identical purpose/scope, but if it's close enough then
I think it's a fair statement (thus not "troll"-like) to say they compete.

> Go read the proposal in the Incubator and instead of trying to roll yet another special
whosamuwhatsit exemption to get around eating the ASF dogfood, why don't you try contributing
to something of similar interest?

I don't understand what you ask of me aside from reading the incubator proposal. I profess
ignorance to incubator details, but I don't see how that's relevant since Lucene/Solr is not
in incubator; though SIS is but is not what this legal-discuss communication is about.

> And I don't care what legal mumbo jumbo or special exemptions you're granted, that doesn't
detract from the issue at hand. It's a library that's licensed under GPL or LGPL and unfortunately
there are tons of issues with that.

Back on topic:
I take definite issue with your statements here. This is my perspective:  So there was sincere
uncertainty amongst both of us about exactly how LGPL code could be used by an ASF project,
Lucene/Solr in particular. We shared this uncertainty after looking at ASF policy documents.
Neither of us being experts on such matters, I sought out people/a-venue for resolution. Resolution
is clearly desirable to FUD, which is otherwise what we were left with given non-action. And
barring new developments, (which could still happen, it's early still) there is a resolution.
 Do you dismiss this resolution on legal-discuss by those more knowledgeable about these matters
than you or I?  Well you just did, actually.  Instead of your FUD based statement "there are
tons of issues with [LGPL]" why don't you start by raising a specific point of concern to
this list (not to me but I'll be listening).  You, Chris, don't decide ASF policy, the terms
of either ASL or GPL licenses, nor are you any longer on the Lucene PMC.  Nor do I, nor am

~ David Smiley
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message