Hi Barre!

Thanks for your response!

Adding a classpath exception to your license would certainly make it easier for 
other projects to consume macker. 

ad 1) I don't think it's possible to change the license (minor change but it's 
basically a license change) for an already release project. So I guess you'd 
have to do all the voting stuff / getting the agreement of all major 
contributors and then create a new version of macker with that 
GPL+ClassPathException license which we can consume later on. At least that 
would be the safe route.

ad 2) The macker-maven-plugin is still in the sandbox and didn't yet got 
released ad codehaus. So I think a transition over to your team would also be 
pretty easy - especially since Wayne wrote almost all the code and did already 
agree + it seems you need to write lot of the stuff from scratch anyway after 
changing your interfaces.

But I'm not a codehaus official, so please consider this as a private opinion 
from whom who doesn't like to get sued for license infringement ;)

I think we all gained awareness now and I'm sure you folks will find a solution 
for this in the next few weeks.

txs and LieGrue,
strub

--- On Fri, 5/21/10, Barre Dijkstra <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Barre Dijkstra <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [legal] mojo plugins for GPL licensed core libs?
> To: "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected], "Jasper de Vries" <[email protected]>, 
> [email protected]
> Date: Friday, May 21, 2010, 9:04 AM
> Hey,
> 
> sorry for the delay in my response.
> 
> I've been looking at the exempt clause in the GPL license
> (I've never
> had to use it before in any my licensing) and it looks like
> a good
> option.
> As far as my response on the 3 options of Mark;
> 3 is indeed a theoretical option, since both other options
> are more
> plausible ;-)
> 
> For the next (actually first) major release of macker the
> commiters of
> macker are currently doing a major overhaul of macker which
> includes
> seperating the program entry points (cli, maven plugin, ant
> plugin,
> etc.) from the rest of the logic and making writing new
> ones as easy
> as 1...2...3..., so a rewrite of the plugin will be
> necessary for that
> release anyway. As discussed briefly with Wayne, we would
> indeed like
> to migrate the code to the current codebase (or write our
> own version)
> so a maven connector can/will be distributed with macker by
> default
> (or as part of a connector package, which is still under
> consideration).
> What we can do is add the exempt clause for the current
> version of
> macker since it won't break the current licensing, just
> clarify (and
> further legalise) it.
> 
> Again, sorry for my late response and could you reply if
> this option
> is acceptable from your point of view?
> 
> As for macker moving to codehaus; this is not something
> that we can do
> in the short term since it adds some extra
> restrictions/demands to the
> codebase and the project. This does not mean that we're
> not
> considering it for the future, we will just need to make a
> small
> analysis of the impact of the move on the project, etc.
> 
> With kind regards,
> 
> Barre Dijkstra
> 
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Folks, I didn't hear anything now for 4 days.
> >
> > Imo we should go on and drop the macker-maven-plugin
> from the sandbox, since this obviously contains a legal
> threat.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> > --- On Mon, 5/17/10, Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [legal] mojo plugins for
> GPL licensed core libs?
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Cc: "Barre Dijkstra" <[email protected]>
> >> Date: Monday, May 17, 2010, 8:25 PM
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I see 3 ways to go for the macker plugin
> >>
> >> 1.) move it to sf.net and make it GPL too
> >> 2.) add a ClassPath Exception clause to
> macker.jar
> >> 3.) invoke macker only via a jvm fork 'commandline
> call'
> >>
> >> I personally would see 3) as only being of
> theoretical
> >> nature ;)
> >>
> >> And yes, I think this discussion is also important
> to
> >> create/refresh some awareness for all other
> plugins too.
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >> --- On Mon, 5/17/10, Wayne Fay <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > From: Wayne Fay <[email protected]>
> >> > Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [legal] mojo plugins
> for GPL
> >> licensed core libs?
> >> > To: [email protected]
> >> > Cc: "Barre Dijkstra" <[email protected]>
> >> > Date: Monday, May 17, 2010, 7:37 PM
> >> > I was actually contacted just
> >> > recently by Barre Dijkstra (added to CC
> >> > list) who is taking over the Macker project
> from Paul
> >> > Cantrell who was
> >> > the creator.
> >> >
> >> > Barre would like to take over the
> macker-maven-plugin
> >> as he
> >> > will also
> >> > be managing Macker itself, and I said that I
> had no
> >> > particular
> >> > objections. I do not expect that he will join
> Codehaus
> >> and
> >> > the Mojo
> >> > team but rather move it to his own groupId.
> >> >
> >> > Given the legal situation, it may make sense
> for Barre
> >> to
> >> > simply
> >> > rewrite the plugin (its very small) rather
> than
> >> making
> >> > things more
> >> > complicated by reusing it...
> >> >
> >> > This would make the entire conversation moot,
> unless
> >> we
> >> > want to figure
> >> > out how to handle this situation in the
> future for
> >> other
> >> > plugins.
> >> >
> >> > Wayne
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Robert
> Scholte <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > Reading these messages, it seems like we
> could
> >> add a
> >> > goal to the ianal-m-p,
> >> > > namely 'verify-code' to check the
> usage
> >> > of imports/FQN in combination with
> >> > > the license of it's artifact. I'm pretty
> sure
> >> most of
> >> > us aren't lawyers, so
> >> > > it would be nice to have a plugin which
> could
> >> help
> >> > with these delicate
> >> > > issues.
> >> > >
> >> > > - Robert
> >> > >
> >> > >> Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 16:25:47
> -0700
> >> > >> From: [email protected]
> >> > >> To: [email protected]
> >> > >> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [legal] mojo
> plugins
> >> for
> >> > GPL licensed core libs?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> BTW, Codehaus forbids GPL licensed
> project
> >> > >>
> >> > >> -Dan
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 3:29 PM,
> Mark
> >> Struberg
> >> > <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >> > Yea, that would be an option to
> write
> >> an
> >> > interface and pull in the
> >> > >> > actual implementation via
> >> > java.util.ServiceLoader or simply
> classForName.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > As far as I read the codehaus
> licensing
> >> > guidelines [1] we are _not_
> >> > >> > allowed to host GPL licensed
> plugins at
> >> > codehaus.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > LieGrue,
> >> > >> > strb
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > [1] http://codehaus.org/customs/licenses.html
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > --- On Sun, 5/16/10, Stephen
> Connolly
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> > >> > wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > From: Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>
> >> > >> > Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [legal]
> mojo
> >> plugins
> >> > for GPL licensed core libs?
> >> > >> > To: [email protected]
> >> > >> > Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010,
> 10:22 PM
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > IANAL,
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > If the GPL code has tainted
> the
> >> > macker-maven-plugin, then we need to
> >> > >> > change the license on
> >> macker-maven-plugin to
> >> > GPL... a change that AFAIK is
> >> > >> > possible (i.e. you can go ASL-2
> ->
> >> GPL you
> >> > just cannot go GPL -> ASL-2 )
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I guess the question is has it
> been
> >> tainted?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > When dealing with GPL
> libraries, if you
> >> want
> >> > to keep yourself taint free
> >> > >> > the best way is to interface
> via an API
> >> that
> >> > has multiple implementations,
> >> > >> > that way you can prove that the
> GPL code
> >> is
> >> > only dynamically linked with
> >> > >> > your code and as there are
> non-GPL
> >> > implementations of the API, everything is
> >> > >> > hunky-dorey
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > As java is all dynamic linking
> (except
> >> for
> >> > uberjars) the question of
> >> > >> > taint basically boils down to
> what API
> >> the
> >> > library you are using is... for
> >> > >> > example, if you write a JDBC
> client,
> >> IANAL
> >> > but my understanding is that it
> >> > >> > can safely be ASL-2 even if
> 99.99% of
> >> the
> >> > time it is using a GPL JDBC
> >> > >> > driver.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > So for example with the
> >> vcc.dev.java.net
> >> > project, I have designed a
> >> > >> > virtualization api
> independently from
> >> any of
> >> > the implementations... the api
> >> > >> > is ASL-2... the fact that the
> xen
> >> > implementation of the api will have to be
> >> > >> > GPL is OK, because I have the
> ASL-2
> >> licensed
> >> > VMware implementation as the
> >> > >> > reference implementation.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > -Stephen
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On 16 May 2010 11:58, Mark
> Struberg
> >> <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Hi!
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I recently tried to help with
> the
> >> > macker-maven-plugin [1] and figured
> >> > >> > that macker [2] itself (the
> underlying
> >> > library being used) is GPL licensed.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > So, since the Mojos in
> >> macker-maven-plugin
> >> > import files from the macker
> >> > >> > library, this imo conflicts
> with the
> >> ASL-2
> >> > license used in the
> >> > >> > macker-maven-plugin. Do be
> more
> >> specific, the
> >> > macker-maven-plugin being
> >> > >> > ASL-2 licensed conflicts with
> the GPL
> >> > license.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > So, what to do?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > LieGrue,
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > strub
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > PS: please note the distinction
> between
> >> GPL
> >> > and LGPL and ClasspathGPL.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > [1] http://mojo.codehaus.org/macker-maven-plugin/
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > [2] http://www.innig.net/macker/
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > To unsubscribe from this list,
> please
> >> visit:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > To unsubscribe from this list,
> please
> >> visit:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> To unsubscribe from this list,
> please visit:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > ________________________________
> >> > > New Windows 7: Find the right PC for
> you. Learn
> >> more.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >> >
> >> >     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >>
> >>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply via email to