I don't think so, Dave. Looks like those dependencies were removed in the past or are things released under ASFv2 license. Trafodion doesn't have any references to the license in question.
--Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Birdsall [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 9:03 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: FW: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License > > We use some Facebook classes in the implementation of NAString. Is there a > license issue there? > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: John D. Ament [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2017 8:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [DISCUSS] Notice to Podlings RE Facebook BSD+Patents License > > All, > > I plan to send the below email, or some form of it, to all podlings in the > coming days. I don't think anything on here is private or confidential so I > don't think it's an issue discussing it in the open. Podlings who may be > reading this, please understand that this is a draft only. Feel free to > discuss > and provide input on this list as well. Do not take the contents of this > email > as a final decision or path forward until you have received it on your dev > list. > > ------------------- > Dear Podlings, > > I'm writing to inform you of a legal decision that has been made that may > impact your podling. During a recent request [1], the foundation reviewed > the license on a project called RocksDB which at that time was licensed under > the Facebook BSD+Patents License. Based on the foundation's review, it was > determined that software that used this license fell under what we call > Category X, the category for all licenses that may not be included in Apache > products. In turn, RocksDB was relicensed to the Apache license. > This license is used in a number of other Facebook Open Source projects. A > request was then made to relicense other software under the Apache > License. This request was declined. > > I wanted to reach out to all podlings at this point to reiterate the goals of > incubation. We don't expect that you have perfect releases while in the > incubator, but that by the time you exit the incubator you are complying with > foundation policy around all of your releases. So what does this mean? > Basically, while you are incubating if you are using a project that is shipped > with this license you should follow these guidelines: > > - While producing a source release, ensure that no source code with this > license is in your release. > - Avoid creating a binary release with this software in it. > - Podlings who are not already using software with this license should not > add it as a dependency. > - By the time you graduate, you must have removed this as a dependency > within your project. > > Basically, we are counting on the fact that a disclaimer is present in your > release bundle to mitigate the foundation defined incorrect release > structure. There may be some podlings that feel that the libraries in > question > are critical to their functionality. Many of these libraries have > alternatives to > consider which you may find useful. However, if you get to a point where > you feel that switching is a blocker to being a successful project, please > bring > it up with your mentors and/or other IPMC members so that we can help you > plan for a way forward. > > Regards, > > John D. Ament > VP, Apache Incubator > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303
