Sorry for the spam, just wanted to note that this dependency was added by
Steve in SOLR-6130 to resolve improper Tika 1.4->1.5 upgrade.

The core issue lies with Tika IMO (they shouldn't rely on LGPL code too I
believe), but I am not sure if it's OK that we distribute this .jar
ourselves.

Shai

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote:

> One update, I did find this dependency is explicitly set in
> solr/contrib/extraction/ivy.xml, under the Tika dependencies section:
>
>     <!-- Tika dependencies - see
> http://tika.apache.org/1.3/gettingstarted.html#Using_Tika_as_a_Maven_dependency
> -->
>     <!-- When upgrading Tika, upgrade dependencies versions and add any
> new ones
>          (except slf4j-api, commons-codec, commons-logging,
> commons-httpclient, geronimo-stax-api_1.0_spec, jcip-annotations, xml-apis,
> asm)
>          WARNING: Don't add netcdf / unidataCommon (partially LGPL code)
> -->
>     ...
>     <dependency org="com.uwyn" name="jhighlight"
> rev="${/com.uwyn/jhighlight}" conf="compile"/>
>
> So it does seem like needed by Tika only and I guess it's a runtime
> dependency, so if we don't want to release this LGPL library, we can omit
> it and put a section in the NOTICE file?
>
> Shai
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Solr's contrib/extraction contains jhighlight-1.0.jar which declares
>> itself as dual CDDL or LGPL license. However, some of its classes are
>> distributed only under LGPL, e.g.
>>
>> com.uwyn.jhighlight.highlighter.
>>   CppHighlighter.java
>>   GroovyHighlighter.java
>>   JavaHighlighter.java
>>   XmlHighlighter.java
>>
>> I downloaded the sources from Maven (
>> http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=com/uwyn/jhighlight/1.0/jhighlight-1.0-sources.jar)
>> to confirm that, and also found this SVN repo:
>> http://svn.rifers.org/jhighlight/tags/release-1.0, though the project's
>> website seems to not exist anymore (https://jhighlight.dev.java.net/).
>>
>> I didn't find any direct usage of it in our code, so I guess it's
>> probably needed by a 3rd party dependency, such as Tika. Therefore if we
>> e.g. omit it, things will compile, but may fail at runtime.
>>
>> Is it OK that we distribute this .jar?
>>
>> Shai
>>
>
>

Reply via email to