www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: A grace period for getting rid of JSON license jars
Date Mon, 21 Nov 2016 21:12:59 GMT
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:01 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> > This preference is equivalent to "unable or unwilling to make proper
> Apache
> > releases".
> I did not mean ASF projects.
> I was thinking about 3rd party code that is used by ASF code.

So far, we don't have any examples of this. The only source code dependency
in a dependency case so far is twitter4j and it was easily dealt with and
the community is receptive.

Projects which depend on the org.json version of the code in a non-optional
way where those projects will not change to fix the problem will become
unusable by ASF code. The ASF projects that use these dependencies will
become unreleasable unless they make some sort of change.

That would suck.  No doubt.  No argument about that.

But that situation is still theoretical. We have no examples of this.

Let's work the problem as it exists right now.

> > The JSON license is unacceptable. It puts ill-defined constraints on the
> > downstream users. It isn't open source. It can't be a dependency for a
> > proper Apache release.
> >
> > The library I have created is one way around the problem, but it is
> > definitely not a long-term solution.
> The problem is, once it has been released, it's going to be difficult
> to un-release it...

I don't plan to un-release it. But I do plan to help projects move away
from depending on my library. The best departure direction is probably

View raw message