www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject License implications of build-time or test-time dependencies?
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:55:41 GMT
Another question that has come up based on review of OpenOffice code.

If a 3rd party module is used as part of the build or test automation,
but is not part of our release, do we care about whether it is
copyleft?  Or do we only care if the 3rd party modules is part of the

For example, our Windows builds use the Microsoft C/C++ compiler. It
is not OSS at all.  But installing it is a pre-req to build on
Windows.  But we don't include the compiler in our release.  I assume
this is OK.

On Linux we rely on available GNU/Linux build tools, almost all
copyleft, but they are not part of the release.  So I assume it is OK.

A trickier case: CppUnit.  This is not a standard platform module.  It
is LGPL.  We use it as a framework for unit testing.  It is the C++
equivalent of JUnit.  I think we should be shipping our unit tests
with our source releases.  This is really useful for downstream
consumers of the code to use when enhancing AOOo, to check for errors.

If we don't include CppUnit in our releases, then a consumer of the
source releases would need to download CppUnit separately as a
pre-req.  So would we when building AOOo.

Are the considerations here, for build-time and test-time dependencies
the same as for any other 3rd party modules in our release?


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

View raw message