www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>
Subject Question about Weak Copyleft (CDDL, etc) and Shading or Fat Jars
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2017 12:41:57 GMT
Hi!

I am wondering about the implications the weak copyleft licenses (Category
B) have on shading and building fat jars in general. Per the legal FAQ,
using these dependencies in binary releases

The general idea behind these licenses is that one can link (or dynamically
link) the binary artifacts, but any use and modification of the source code
triggers the copyleft clauses. Many also state that modifications of
binaries/executables also trigger the copyleft clauses.

Building a fat jar that includes a Category B dependency library could be
viewed as more than linking, even though it is just putting the class files
into a different zip archive (a JAR file is basically a zip archive).

Is there any statement or case that clarifies that?


Related to that is shading/relocating classes, as done by the Maven Shade
Plugin.
This is in some sense a change of the binary artifacts, even though it does
not change any functionality/behavior or create any new behavior, but
simply changes the namespace of the artifact (or parts of it).

Is there any definitive statement on the situation? Having such a statement
would also be very interesting also for downstream consumers of ASF
projects, when they vet the project for commercial use.


Best Regards,
Stephan

Mime
View raw message