On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Mathias Bauer <mathias_ba...@gmx.net>wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm trying to get a build without (L)GPL components. I'm making good > progress, but I'm unsure about the limitations we have. > > Let's consider an arbitrary library, e.g. neon. > > In my build I have disabled neon and so the build system neither builds > the neon module nor the webdav UCP component in the ucb module. But I > have neon on my system, so I could use it, and I wonder whether we could > also use it in an "official" build from ooo.apache.org. > > configure has an option called "--with-system-neon" where the neon > library and the neon headers are expected to be installed elsewhere. > With that option this external neon is used to build the webdav UCP > component in the ucb module. The resulting builds does not contain any > part of neon, and it will run only on a system that has the same neon > version installed. > a good question and if we could use a system version it would be very good until we may find a better alternative. But i am not sure if all patches are already contributed back or better are accepted. I know that Kai Sommerfeld always tried to contribute things back but maybe there are still patches open. > > Would that build be compatible to the Apache license restrictions? > > In that case I would not disable neon in case a "non copyleft" build is > required, but automatically set the "--with-system-neon" option. > > The same is true for a lot of other libraries. > i guess it would definitely help us faster to get a first version faster. Juergen > > Another point is EPM. > The current build system does not create installation sets (packages) > when EPM is disabled. Again there is an option to use EPM from the > system. EPM is just used as a build tool and it is used as a build > prerequisite like the compiler or the linker - so are we allowed to use > that for a release build from ooo.apache.org? > > Regards, > Mathias >
