+1 to remove it. Removing twitter4j example is not a big deal for me.

- Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)

2016년 11월 23일 (수) 오전 6:32, Bobby Evans <[email protected]>님이 작성:

> If it is just one file and it is an example I would say lets remove it.
> If we are worried about it we could add in a pointer to an older release as
> an example with a big warning about the license.
>
>
> - Bobby
>
> On Tuesday, November 22, 2016, 3:13:14 PM CST, P. Taylor Goetz <
> [email protected]> wrote:The ASF recently made the determination that the
> org.json license is category x, meaning projects can’t release code that
> depends on it (the short reason is the license has a “no evil” clause that
> is inappropriate for a license).
>
> Storm is largely unaffected since we use json-simple or Jackson in most
> places (we got off lucky, there are some other projects that are facing a
> world of hurt). However, the twitter4j library directly includes the
> org.json which makes that library category x as well. The only place the
> twitter4j dependency is used is in the `PrintSampleStream` example in
> storm-starter. Because of this, we can’t release.
>
> There’s an ongoing discussion on legal-discuss@ talking about setting a
> grace period for removing that dependency. That would allow projects to
> release with the dependency up to a cut-off date. There’s no decision yet
> as to what the date would be, but there appears to be momentum for the
> license to be “grandfathered” for a period. The two dates mentioned so far
> are 12/31/16 and 6/1/17.
>
> There’s also an effort to get the twitter4j to solve the issue by
> switching parsers.
>
> There are a number of approaches we could take, the simplest being to just
> remove that example. But until the twitter4j library is fixed, or a policy
> decision is reached regarding the grace period, we can’t release.
>
> What are others’ opinions on addressing this?
>
> I’m leaning toward just removing the code for now. It’s a very small
> amount of non-critical code, and could always be brought back if the
> situation changes.
>
> -Taylor
>

Reply via email to