You are right -both projects need to remove it, although it might be easier to work with Tika to fix that and then upgrade again.
Upayavira On Fri, Mar 20, 2015, at 05:26 AM, Shai Erera wrote: > 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 <ser...@gmail.com> 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 <ser...@gmail.com> 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 > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
