Thanks for JB's input. Are we using the artifacts from lib folder ?
> We didn't use any artifacts from the lib folder now and going to use lib/*.[h|cc] after confirming it's ok to only use those files. I searched the GitHub apache organization for lz4, other projects also use lz4: https://github.com/search?l=CMake&q=org%3Aapache+github.com%2Flz4&type=Code and looks good to use when building. On Fri, 27 May 2022 at 11:54, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Are we using the artifacts from lib folder ? If yes, then, it's OK > (BSD license is accepted from Apache standpoint). > > If we use resources from other folders (like program, ettc), then, we > can't as it's under GPL license which is Cat X from Apache standpoint: > > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > > Regards > JB > > On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 4:46 AM hulk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > As proposed at https://github.com/apache/incubator-kvrocks/issues/601 > > lz4 can bring a better compression ratio and performance in many > scenarios > > and rocksdb > > also supported it as a compression library. > > > > But the LICENSE <https://github.com/lz4/lz4/blob/dev/LICENSE> of lz4 > was a > > bit confused, coz it said that: > > > > *- all files in the `lib` directory use a BSD 2-Clause license* > > *- all other files use a GPL v2 license unless explicitly stated > otherwise* > > > > and some files like CMakeLists.txt > > <https://github.com/lz4/lz4/blob/dev/build/cmake/CMakeLists.txt> stated > > another license: zero 1.0. > > > > On the other hand, apache GPL Compatibility > > <https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html> stated that we > > can't include the GPL v3 projects > > and I'm NOT sure about whether we can include GPL v2 projects or not? > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > - *Hulk Lin* > -- Best Regards, - *Hulk Lin*
