Re: Taking over development of DataViews

From: Adrian Wiesmann (awiesman..omap.org)
Date: Thu Apr 12 2007 - 10:29:47 EDT

  • Next message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Taking over development of DataViews - Licenses"

    Andrus

    > Per recent discussion on Apache Legal list [2], it is NOT OK to take
    > Apache code and strip the license headers from it and relicense them
    > as GPL.

    That was not the plan. We would keep the licence an notices on all files
    and just put these files directly into our own project. So our project
    would contain ASL and GPL code. I thought that if both projects agree this
    should not be of a problem. But I agree this solution is not perfect in a
    legal view.

    The technicaly easiest solution would be if Cayenne agrees in our project
    taking exlusively (and only for our SOBF Tool) the data view source code
    (and dvmodeler) and relicence it under the GPL. With the condition that we
    dual-licence everything we do on the DataViews under the ASL. Like that we
    could integrate everything without the need to have a separate lib.

    The legaly easiest solution would be to just extract the DataView from
    Cayenne and create a new lib licenced under the ASL. But this is a hassle
    for the development process which I would welcome to not have. Except
    there is some trick to tell Eclipse to handle two separate projects as one
    (debugging and compiling).

    But I guess we have to go this second way :(

    Do the licence requirements concerning the written CLA apply when
    submitting back to Cayenne or before? And only if we don't fork?

    > So - is there any way you can continue using Apache-licensed
    > DataViews (as a library dependency or something? I am not a big
    > expert on GPL limitations)? This should be easier from the technical
    > POV as well, as you won't need to fork and resubmit patches to keep
    > Cayenne in sync.

    Just a quick question. Is the DataView still in the 3.0 bleeding edge
    build? If so, we have to change the namespace anyway and there would be no
    gain in making a new library.

    > The GPL/Apache
    > license incompatibility hurts everybody, but that's how things are
    > until ASF and FSF work it out :-(

    I never thought I'd say this. But this licencing stuff turns out to be
    royal PITA.

    Regards,
    Adrian



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Apr 12 2007 - 10:31:38 EDT