www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: Using an LGPL dependency in Apache-licensed software
Date Thu, 21 Sep 2017 21:57:26 GMT
As I recall the LGPL says that if you modified the source then you must make your modifications
available. However, I could be wrong on that.

Ralph

> On Sep 21, 2017, at 11:45 AM, Chris Dembia <cld72@cornell.edu> wrote:
> 
> Thank you Stain. This is a point of confusion for me. It is both the case that the LGPL
part's source code is copied into my repository, *and* that this part is compiled into their
own JARs that users should be able to swap out for their own JARs. In this case, do I avoid
the need to change the license for my own code to LGPL?
> 
> Thank you,
> Chris
> 
>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org <mailto:stain@apache.org>>
wrote:
>> 
>> Be aware that if you import the LGPL part into your source repository, that may mean
that effectively distribution of any compiled binaries also needs to be LGPL "upgraded", as
it's license requires that the LGPL part can be user-replaced. (dvd player scenario)
>> 
>> In a traditional desktop/server Java project this is simple to achieve by having
the LGPL part as a separate and clearly named JAR, referenced from your LICENCE.
>> 
>> If your application is source-only like with Python or JavaScript there should not
be much to worry about, but if you are compiling a C-program or make other kind of binary
bundles you (or your downstream) need to be more careful. 
>> 
>> Using the Apache license for your own contribution is still more permissive than
going full LGPL, as it allows third-parties to remove the LGPL-component and use (parts of)
your code under the Apache license. Your code can also then be "upgraded" to GPL3 if needed.
>> 
>> On 21 Sep 2017 4:33 pm, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com <mailto:ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>>
wrote:
>> Chris,
>> 
>> Yes, you are free to use the Apache license for your software and have a dependency
that is LGPL licensed. The restrictions about not using LGPL’d software as a required dependency
at the ASF is a policy decision as it means that anyone using the Apache licensed software
has to comply with the LGPL requirements, which are more restrictive than the Apache license
and user’s might be surprised or confused by that.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>> > On Sep 21, 2017, at 12:34 AM, Chris Dembia <cld72@cornell.edu <mailto:cld72@cornell.edu>>
wrote:
>> >
>> > Thank you for the helpful licensing Q&As you have made available on apache.org
<http://apache.org/>. There’s a point on which I could use additional guidance, if
anyone on this list would be willing to help me.
>> >
>> > I would like to use the Apache 2.0 license for a project of mine (this project
has nothing to do with the Apache Software Foundation other than my desire to use the Apache
2.0 license). I’ve copied source code for a dependency into my project (into my git repository),
and this dependency is LGPL-licensed. My question is: am I able to license my code under the
Apache 2.0 license in this scenario?
>> >
>> > This website (http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x>)
says that an LGPL-licensed work cannot be included in an Apache 2.0-licensed work. Is this
the case only for projects within the Apache Software Foundation? I understand that using
copyleft components in Apache 2.0-licensed software somewhat defeats the purpose of using
a permissive license for my project, but I would like to use this LGPL-licensed dependency,
and of the existing permissive licenses, I would like to use the Apache license. Are the LGPL
and Apache licenses incompatible in the direction where LGPL-licensed work is used within
Apache-licensed work? Of course, I would need to comply with the terms of the LGPL license
for the dependency (by allowing relinking, etc.).
>> >
>> > Thank you for any help you can provide.
>> > Chris
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org <mailto:legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org>
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org <mailto:legal-discuss-help@apache.org>
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org <mailto:legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org <mailto:legal-discuss-help@apache.org>
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message