Liling—Would it work to get the permission of just those people who are in the commit log of the specific scripts you want to port?
matt (from my phone) > Le 10 avr. 2018 à 18:19, liling tan <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Got it. > > So I think we'll just remove the MosesTokenizer and MosesDetokenizer function > from NLTK and maybe create a PR to put it in mosesdecoder/scripts/tokenizer > > Thank you for the clarification! > Liling > >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:17 AM, Hieu Hoang <[email protected]> wrote: >> Still the same problem - everyone owns Moses so you need everyone's >> permission, not just mine. So no >> >> Hieu Hoang >> http://moses-smt.org/ >> >> >>> On 10 April 2018 at 17:13, liling tan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I understand. >>> >>> Could we have permission that it's okay to derive work from Moses with >>> respect to the (de-)tokenizer and possibly other scripts under an >>> MIT/Apache tool? >>> >>> Legally it's a restriction but I think for what's it worth, having mutual >>> agreement between the OSS is sufficient to still keep any port of LGPL work >>> until someone starts to enforce legal actions and I think it's safe to back >>> off to taking down these functionalities in the Apache/MIT code. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Liling >>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:09 AM, Hieu Hoang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> we can't change the license, or dual license it, without the agreement of >>>> everyone who's contributed to Moses. Too much work >>>> >>>> Hieu Hoang >>>> http://moses-smt.org/ >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 10 April 2018 at 15:47, liling tan <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Dear Moses Dev, >>>>> >>>>> NLTK has a Python port of the word tokenizer in Moses. The tokenizer >>>>> works well in Python and create a good synergy to bridge Python users to >>>>> the code that Moses developers have spent years to hone. >>>>> >>>>> But it seemed to have hit a wall with some licensing issues. >>>>> https://github.com/nltk/nltk/issues/2000 >>>>> >>>>> General port of LGPL code is considered derivative and is incompatible >>>>> with Apache or MIT license. I understand that LGPL keeps derivative from >>>>> being proprietary but it's a little less permissive than non-copyleft >>>>> license like Apache and MIT licenses. >>>>> >>>>> Note that this licensing issue might also affect Marian which is MIT >>>>> license and also incompatible with LGPL so although technically users can >>>>> chain the code from different libraries, but Marian couldn't have any >>>>> dependencies on the Moses components. (But we know do know that none of >>>>> our models built with Marian would work without the Moses tokenizer which >>>>> is in LGPL). >>>>> >>>>> Would there be a possibility to dual license the Moses repository with >>>>> LGPL and Apache/BSD/MIT license. I'm not sure whether it's allowed to >>>>> have dual licenses with LGPL and Apache/BSD/MIT license though. Might >>>>> have to check with some proper legal personnel though. >>>>> >>>>> If dual license is not possible would it be possible relicense the code >>>>> under BSD/Apache/MIT license? That way it's more permissive for >>>>> derivatiive work? >>>>> >>>>> I think the last scenario is for NLTK to drop the Python port of Moses >>>>> code entirely from Apache license repository but I think that'll remove >>>>> the synergy between various OSS. >>>>> >>>>> Hope to hear from Moses devs soon! >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Liling >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Moses-support mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Moses-support mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
_______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
