www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-286) Apache Celix optional module with a LGPL dependency
Date Mon, 16 Jan 2017 04:42:27 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15823457#comment-15823457
] 

Henri Yandell commented on LEGAL-286:
-------------------------------------

Assuming that multicast UDP is the default, and that the licensing of the optional dependency
is prominently labelled (i.e. wherever you document the optional dependency, you should indicate
that it is an unusual license (for an Apache project)), this is fine.

I'm aiming to rewrite that ip-clearance page as it is very dated/confusing.

Leaving open for a couple of days in case anyone disagrees. 

> Apache Celix optional module with a LGPL dependency
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-286
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-286
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Pepijn Noltes
>
> The Apache Celix project is in the process of accepting a donation which implements a
service oriented publish subscribe mechanism. The publish subscribe feature will be an optional
feature for Apache Celix. 
> The donation contains two transport implementations one based on multicast UDP and one
based on zeromq (http://zeromq.org). 
>  
> The question is:
> Can Apache Celix release and distribute a optional module “PubSubAdmin ZMQ” which
uses the zeromq library (LGPL) to create a service oriented  publish subscribe mechanism?
> The zeromq library itself will not be distributed by Apache Celix and will be considered
a system requirement when the “PubSubAdmin ZMQ” option is selected. 
> When looking at the Previously Asked Questions [1] and Draft and out of date, but mentioned
as guidance, Third Party Licensing Policy [2] (specifically the part of system requirements)
I get the impression that this is acceptable. This is more or less confirmed in LEGAL-279
[3]. 
> The donation will also need an IP clearance and when looking at the IP clearance template
[4] I got a bit confused. Specifically the text: “Check and make sure that all items depended
upon by the project is covered by one or more of the following approved licenses: Apache,
BSD, Artistic, MIT/X, MIT/W3C, MPL 1.1, or something with essentially the same terms.” 
> Hopefully with this question we can remove the uncertainty.
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional
> [2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site/trunk/archive/legal/3party.mdtext
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-279
> [4] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

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


Mime
View raw message