www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: A grace period for getting rid of JSON license jars
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2016 19:30:25 GMT
Hello,

Has a decision been reached by any chance?  We're looking to kick off
the next Apache NiFi release and while we've done the work to
eliminate the use of this library it required us to reduce user
convenience in one case that we'd love to undo and expect the grace
period will resolve.

Thanks
Joe

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I like this too, but would rather have the "next release after xxx/yyy" form
> of deadline.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>>
>> The more I think about it, the more this makes sense. Basically
>> we refuse the use of it for any new projects/efforts, but those
>> projects which are currently using it, with no issues, should
>> be allowed to continue using them, grandfathered, at least for
>> a time being.
>>
>> Let me mull this over some more and make an official determination/
>> ruling. :)
>>
>> > On Nov 16, 2016, at 2:22 PM, Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The recent moving of the JSON license to category X means that a number
>> > of projects cannot do any releases until this is fixed.  I know this
>> > includes Hadoop, Hive, and Spark, and probably a number of others since
>> > hadoop-common (which many project use) depends on jars from json.org.  The
>> > Hive team in particular is trying to get a maintenance release out which is
>> > blocked by this.
>> >
>> > I talked with Jim Jagielski briefly today and he suggested that perhaps
>> > we could have a grandfather clause on this so that projects that already are
>> > using it could continue to, at least for a period of time, so that they can
>> > continue to produce releases rather than needing to spend unplanned time
>> > switching out this library[1].
>> >
>> > To be specific I propose we give projects already using this license 6
>> > months to clean this up in which they can continue to release with
>> > dependencies on the JSON license.
>> >
>> > Alan.
>> >
>> > 1. The amount of time to fix this will not be trivial.  Based on a
>> > little bit of digging I’ve done the alternatives are not 100% identical in
>> > their behavior which will mean projects will need to thoroughly test the
>> > replacements and change their code to deal with the differences.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>
>

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


Mime
View raw message