www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lawrence Rosen" <lro...@rosenlaw.com>
Subject RE: [License-discuss] [FTF-Legal] Proposal: Apache Third Party License Policy
Date Sat, 23 May 2015 17:03:46 GMT
Mike Milinkovich wrote:

> I hope that helps. We certainly want to do whatever is necessary to ensure
that the ASF feels comfortable using EPL-licensed code.

 

Mike, as always from you, wonderful!

 

Me too! That's why I proposed an unambiguous new Apache Third Party License
Policy. I have had no worse motives than that.

 

/Larry

 

 

From: Mike Milinkovich [mailto:mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 1:23 PM
To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com; 'Mark Thomas'; legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [FTF-Legal] Proposal: Apache Third Party
License Policy

 

On 21/05/2015 1:13 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:

Asking Mike Milinkovich what he meant above: Do you also love that other
Apache projects use other Eclipse software in our aggregations? 


Of course. We love all adopters of Eclipse projects....just like our friends
at Apache love it when we use their projects. Please use more!




Can our projects freely aggregate with Eclipse software without infecting
our other contributions and distributed software?


I have no idea what you mean by "infect". The EPL is not a "viral" license.




IIUC, the only important things your Eclipse license require that aren't
essentially the same in our Apache License 2.0 are (1) that we inform people
of this incorporation of your software in our NOTICE file; 


I think that is an Apache rule, not an Eclipse rule. See below for a comment
on what notification *is* required. 




and (2) that
anyone who modifies and redistributes *derivative works of Eclipse software*
must disclose the source code of *those derivative works*. 


I would phrase that differently. The requirement is not just to "...disclose
the source code...", it is to make that source code available under the
Eclipse Public License. 

There are additional requirements for the ASF as well, such as providing a
pointer to where the source code for the distributed EPL code can be found.
So in the case of Tomcat distributing the EPL-licensed ecj, I would hope
that somewhere in the documentation there is a pointer to where the source
can be found. (I have not checked.) A pointer to the relevant repository at
eclipse.org would suffice.

I hope that helps. We certainly want to do whatever is necessary to ensure
that the ASF feels comfortable using EPL-licensed code.

-- 
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org <mailto:mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org> 
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)


Mime
View raw message