Hi Chris, Thanks for the update.
>Interestingly, I also found that McKoi has switched to GPLv3, which, >unlike GPLv2, is compatible with the Apache2 license: >http://www.mckoi.com/License.html To muddy things further: >However, GPLv3 software cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses >are incompatible in one direction >only, and it is a result of ASF's licensing philosophy and the GPLv3 authors' >interpretation of copyright law. http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html Who to believe? The Apache Foundation or the FSF :) Cheers Dirk -----Original Message----- From: cwil...@gmail.com [mailto:cwil...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Chris Wilper Sent: 23 September 2010 17:25 To: Gorissen D. Cc: fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net; fedora-commons-develop...@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [fcrepo-dev] Fedora, 3rd party licences and commercial use Dirk, While updating the license page, I had a look at the source code and realized that we are in fact distributing the McKoi JDBC driver for people who want to integrate with an existing database. So I clarified the license page to indicate that it's the JDBC driver only, and it's optional. Interestingly, I also found that McKoi has switched to GPLv3, which, unlike GPLv2, is compatible with the Apache2 license: http://www.mckoi.com/License.html Regardless, I have created a request to drop McKoi support in future versions. See the url below for more detail/reasoning. https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/FCREPO-804 Thanks, Chris On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Chris Wilper <cwil...@duraspace.org> wrote: > Hi Dirk, > > Thanks for pointing this out...this license page clearly needs to be > reviewed for accuracy with the latest releases. > > Generally, we do not include GPL(2) libraries with Fedora due to > license incompatibility. Most notably, McKoi is no longer included > with Fedora -- we actually switched to Derby as the bundled pure java > database option some time ago. I will get this corrected on the > license page shortly. > > Fedora has been distributed under several open source licenses in the > past, but we have finally settled on Apache 2 due to its widespread > use (familiarity) and commercial friendliness. I don't anticipate > this will change any time soon. > > Thanks, > Chris > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Gorissen D. <dirk.goris...@soton.ac.uk> > wrote: >> Just a quick follow-up, >> >> Again, I am not a lawyer but from >> http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html it seems that the FSF >> considers Apache 2.0 and GPL 2 to be incompatible. Yet, for example, Mckoi >> (which Fedora uses) is licensed under the GPL 2.0 >> (http://www.mckoi.com/Mckoi%20SQL%20Database.html). The whole derivative >> works issue is very murky and I dislike this licensing business as much as >> the next coder but its just something I noticed. >> >> Cheers >> Dirk >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gorissen D. [mailto:dirk.goris...@soton.ac.uk] >> Sent: 21 September 2010 14:46 >> To: fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net >> Cc: fedora-commons-develop...@lists.sourceforge.net >> Subject: [fcrepo-dev] Fedora, 3rd party licences and commercial use >> >> Hello, >> >> I have been evaluating the use of Fedora-commons for our project (which may >> eventually include a commercial angle). I am still very new to the Fedora >> project, so bear with me :) >> >> When going through the license information on >> http://www.fedora-commons.org/software/licenses I noticed that the list >> does not seem fully up to date. For example the websites of apache-batik, >> Jakarta-oro and apache-commons list the license as being Apache 2.0 vs >> Apache 1.1. Similar for Jersey. Also, as an aside, some of these 3rd party >> libraries seem to be no longer maintained (eg., Jakarta-oro) or superseded >> (McKoi vs Derby? JMX?). Finally, the "more info" links return a 403 error. >> >> However, I did not check which versions are actually included in the latest >> Fedora release but maybe it is worth checking if this page is still up to >> date. I did not manually check everything, but the list of licences I get >> are: >> >> Apache License 2.0, Apache License 1.1, LGPL 2.1, LGPL 2.0, MIT, public >> domain, dual CDDL 1.0 and GPL 2 with CPE, BSD, CDDL 1.0, CPL 1.0, GPL 2.0, >> OSL 3.0/Apache 2.0, MPL 1.0, Sun binary code >> >> I am still unsure what all this means from a compatibility/redistribution >> standpoint, but then again I am not a lawyer. It seems there are some >> commercial routes being explored with Fedora, I would be interested in any >> success stories, tips, or experience. >> >> If any (major) changes are pending with regard to license policy that would >> also be worth knowing (e.g., following the Duraspace initiative). >> >> Many thanks, >> >> Best regards, >> >> Dirk > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Fedora-commons-users mailing list Fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
