www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.INVALID>
Subject Re: Can a project use an EPL 1.0 jar modified elsewhere?
Date Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:03:28 GMT
PS we should really approach the original situation from 2 different perspectives:
a.) is it legally ok?
b.) is this good for the NetBeans project?

I think a.) can be answered with yes. We had this in Apache Maven for AGES with the Nexus
and Sisu parts :(

Regaring b.): I'd not suggest this for a long time solution. After all the whole NetBeans
project now relies on an externally built jar. Which can dissapear, which is not easy to get
fixed, etc.
But they have this on their radar and I'm very confident that this get's resolved in mid-term
future. So I'm less worried overall.

LieGrue,
strub



> Am 13.02.2018 um 16:51 schrieb Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de.INVALID>:
> 
> EPL §1(b) allows to add own originary work under any license.
> 'Derivative Work' otoh will stay EPL.
> 
> I'd assume that the threshold of originality was not surpassed with the given change,
isn't?
> So the file is still all EPL I'd argue.
> 
> Btw, as ASF we don't care much whether this jar was released by Eclipse or by some other
third party.
> All we have to care is that the jar is really EPL and doesn't contain any 'bad files'.
> 
> Given that we know Jaruslav and have all the commit trails + patch I think we are on
the safe side.
> 
> Just my personal $.02 of course.
> 
> LieGrue,
> strub
> 
>> Am 13.02.2018 um 16:40 schrieb David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com>:
>> 
>> This still strikes me as odd. Now we have an EPL 1.0 jar modified here at Apache.
The source file being patched is EPL 1.0 and the patch is marked AL 2.  What license is the
resulting jar under?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> David Jencks
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 11:31 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com>
wrote:
>>> 
>>> Proposed solution is in the issue --
>>> 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-361
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/421
>>> 
>>> Gj
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:50 AM, David Jencks <david.a.jencks@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>> I’ve been wondering about LEGAL-361 and since I don’t see any recent
>>>> activity on the issue itself I’m asking here.
>>>> 
>>>> If I understand the situation, netbeans wants a bug-fixed eclipse foundation
>>>> jar, and the eclipse foundation won’t provide it. One proposed solution
is
>>>> something like putting the EPL 1.0 source on GitHub, fixing the problem
>>>> there, building it somehow, and including the result (I assume in a released
>>>> convenience binary).
>>>> 
>>>> I personally think this is a terrible idea, and after looking at EPL 1.0
I
>>>> can’t really tell if it is consistent with the license.
>>>> 
>>>> Would doing this be consistent with apache policy?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
> 


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


Mime
View raw message