Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Niels Basjes]

Committed.

On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Niels Basjes  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Because this is tricky I decided to first let you guys review everything
> before actually committing.
> https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/271
>
> This is the following set of commits:
> AVRO-2118
> 1) Reverting the problematic commits by Thiruvalluvan M G
> 2) Applying Zoltans new license headers
> 3) Me removing the author tag.
> AVRO-2119
> 4) Making sure Apache Rat runs 'always'
>
> - At this point I found the build took ages because it was running rat
> also in all child projects AND failing on many files.
>
> 5) Upgrading Apache Rat and making sure it only runs in the top level
> project.
>
> I would appreciate it if you guys could check if this set of commits is
> correct now.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Niels Basjes
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Sean Busbey  wrote:
>
>> I think so.
>>
>> It'd be better for someone who hasn't seen the current file to do the
>> code cleanup. But I don't think that's a blocker.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > It has been about 1 week now.
>> > Zoltan has put up a pull request correcting the copyright issue very
>> > quickly last week.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately I haven't seen any response from Thiruvalluvan M G <
>> > th...@startsmartlabs.com> yet.
>> > Since his changes were very simple (basic code cleanup) I propose we do
>> the
>> > following so we can cleanup the codebase and close the issues/pull
>> requests
>> > related to all of this.
>> >
>> > 1) I do a git revert on the two affected files and simply rollback his
>> > changes. So "the changes made under the wrong license" are gone.
>> > 2) I merge the fix by Zoltan to correct the licenses.
>> > 3) I cleanup the code (now under the correct license).
>> > 4) I include the related things that have already been checked.
>> >
>> > At this point I am unsure: Is this a valid way (from a licensing
>> > perspective) to fix this?
>> >
>> > Niels
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Suraj Acharya 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> As part of the release we do run the rat plugin.
>> >> So it is a highly unlikely this would have been run through a release.
>> >> However, changing it now is a great addition since the release manager
>> has
>> >> to go through the whole license check for all of the files.
>> >> Also, as Sean mentioned anyone who has made any changes to the file
>> after
>> >> the addition of the license will also need to be informed of the
>> change to
>> >> the license.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Suraj
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi all,
>> >> >
>> >> > After we hear back from Thiru I would like Zoltan to fix these 4
>> files.
>> >> >
>> >> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
>> >> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
>> >> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > schema/Schemas.java
>> >> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > schema/CloningVisitor.java
>> >> >
>> >> > See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2118
>> >> >
>> >> > After those have been fixed we can commit this change (guys, please
>> >> review
>> >> > this. Thanks.)
>> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2119
>> >> >
>> >> > Niels Basjes
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Niels Basjes 
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hi all,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I had a closer look at the code base.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Most important:
>> >> > > 1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
>> >> > > 2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are
>> NOT
>> >> > > present in any of those releases. (
>> >> > > So we're ok on this part.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
>> >> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
>> >> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> >> > > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd58
>> 2b393e8f
>> >> > > 1b8df573c9
>> >> > >
>> >> > > commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
>> >> > >> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> >> > >> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
>> >> > >> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> >> > >> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
>> >> > >> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted
>> the
>> >> code
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > In both these files the only changes are:
>> >> > > - Removing the author tag
>> >> > > - 

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Sean Busbey]

I think so.

It'd be better for someone who hasn't seen the current file to do the
code cleanup. But I don't think that's a blocker.

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It has been about 1 week now.
> Zoltan has put up a pull request correcting the copyright issue very
> quickly last week.
>
> Unfortunately I haven't seen any response from Thiruvalluvan M G <
> th...@startsmartlabs.com> yet.
> Since his changes were very simple (basic code cleanup) I propose we do the
> following so we can cleanup the codebase and close the issues/pull requests
> related to all of this.
>
> 1) I do a git revert on the two affected files and simply rollback his
> changes. So "the changes made under the wrong license" are gone.
> 2) I merge the fix by Zoltan to correct the licenses.
> 3) I cleanup the code (now under the correct license).
> 4) I include the related things that have already been checked.
>
> At this point I am unsure: Is this a valid way (from a licensing
> perspective) to fix this?
>
> Niels
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Suraj Acharya  wrote:
>
>> As part of the release we do run the rat plugin.
>> So it is a highly unlikely this would have been run through a release.
>> However, changing it now is a great addition since the release manager has
>> to go through the whole license check for all of the files.
>> Also, as Sean mentioned anyone who has made any changes to the file after
>> the addition of the license will also need to be informed of the change to
>> the license.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Suraj
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > After we hear back from Thiru I would like Zoltan to fix these 4 files.
>> >
>> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
>> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
>> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > schema/Schemas.java
>> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > schema/CloningVisitor.java
>> >
>> > See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2118
>> >
>> > After those have been fixed we can commit this change (guys, please
>> review
>> > this. Thanks.)
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2119
>> >
>> > Niels Basjes
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > I had a closer look at the code base.
>> > >
>> > > Most important:
>> > > 1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
>> > > 2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are NOT
>> > > present in any of those releases. (
>> > > So we're ok on this part.
>> > >
>> > > I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
>> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
>> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
>> > > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
>> > >
>> > > I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
>> > > 1b8df573c9
>> > >
>> > > commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
>> > >> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> > >> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
>> > >> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> > >> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
>> > >> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted the
>> code
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In both these files the only changes are:
>> > > - Removing the author tag
>> > > - Whitespace changes.
>> > >
>> > > See:
>> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
>> > > 1b8df573c9#diff-d0adffb4097a1e43917fd5c3f2aae1ab
>> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
>> > > 1b8df573c9#diff-ced3f0d25217ef63c2f2ea09a8b60e92
>> > >
>> > > @Thiru: To be 100% sure: You agree with changing these two files to the
>> > > Apache license?
>> > >
>> > > Niels Basjes
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sean Busbey 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has
>> modified
>> > >> the files.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Have these files made it into a release?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> Zoltan,
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best
>> way
>> > >> to
>> > >> >> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those
>> > files
>> > >> >> files having a new license header.
>> > >> >> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this
>> > >> should
>> > >> >> be a separate 

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Niels Basjes]

Hi all,

It has been about 1 week now.
Zoltan has put up a pull request correcting the copyright issue very
quickly last week.

Unfortunately I haven't seen any response from Thiruvalluvan M G <
th...@startsmartlabs.com> yet.
Since his changes were very simple (basic code cleanup) I propose we do the
following so we can cleanup the codebase and close the issues/pull requests
related to all of this.

1) I do a git revert on the two affected files and simply rollback his
changes. So "the changes made under the wrong license" are gone.
2) I merge the fix by Zoltan to correct the licenses.
3) I cleanup the code (now under the correct license).
4) I include the related things that have already been checked.

At this point I am unsure: Is this a valid way (from a licensing
perspective) to fix this?

Niels


On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Suraj Acharya  wrote:

> As part of the release we do run the rat plugin.
> So it is a highly unlikely this would have been run through a release.
> However, changing it now is a great addition since the release manager has
> to go through the whole license check for all of the files.
> Also, as Sean mentioned anyone who has made any changes to the file after
> the addition of the license will also need to be informed of the change to
> the license.
>
> Thanks
>
> Suraj
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After we hear back from Thiru I would like Zoltan to fix these 4 files.
> >
> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/Schemas.java
> > lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/CloningVisitor.java
> >
> > See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2118
> >
> > After those have been fixed we can commit this change (guys, please
> review
> > this. Thanks.)
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2119
> >
> > Niels Basjes
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I had a closer look at the code base.
> > >
> > > Most important:
> > > 1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
> > > 2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are NOT
> > > present in any of those releases. (
> > > So we're ok on this part.
> > >
> > > I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
> > > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
> > >
> > > I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > > 1b8df573c9
> > >
> > > commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
> > >> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> > >> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
> > >> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> > >> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
> > >> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted the
> code
> > >
> > >
> > > In both these files the only changes are:
> > > - Removing the author tag
> > > - Whitespace changes.
> > >
> > > See:
> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > > 1b8df573c9#diff-d0adffb4097a1e43917fd5c3f2aae1ab
> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > > 1b8df573c9#diff-ced3f0d25217ef63c2f2ea09a8b60e92
> > >
> > > @Thiru: To be 100% sure: You agree with changing these two files to the
> > > Apache license?
> > >
> > > Niels Basjes
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sean Busbey 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has
> modified
> > >> the files.
> > >>
> > >> On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Have these files made it into a release?
> > >> >
> > >> > On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Zoltan,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best
> way
> > >> to
> > >> >> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those
> > files
> > >> >> files having a new license header.
> > >> >> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this
> > >> should
> > >> >> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> What do you guys think about this approach?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much
> > more
> > >> >> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate
> > >> profile
> > >> >> of maven)
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Niels Basjes
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > 

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Suraj Acharya]

As part of the release we do run the rat plugin.
So it is a highly unlikely this would have been run through a release.
However, changing it now is a great addition since the release manager has
to go through the whole license check for all of the files.
Also, as Sean mentioned anyone who has made any changes to the file after
the addition of the license will also need to be informed of the change to
the license.

Thanks

Suraj


On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> After we hear back from Thiru I would like Zoltan to fix these 4 files.
>
> lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
> lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/SchemaVisitor.java
> lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/Schemas.java
> lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/CloningVisitor.java
>
> See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2118
>
> After those have been fixed we can commit this change (guys, please review
> this. Thanks.)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2119
>
> Niels Basjes
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I had a closer look at the code base.
> >
> > Most important:
> > 1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
> > 2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are NOT
> > present in any of those releases. (
> > So we're ok on this part.
> >
> > I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
> > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
> > ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> > schema/SchemaVisitor.java
> >
> > I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > 1b8df573c9
> >
> > commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
> >> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> >> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
> >> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> >> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
> >> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted the code
> >
> >
> > In both these files the only changes are:
> > - Removing the author tag
> > - Whitespace changes.
> >
> > See:
> > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > 1b8df573c9#diff-d0adffb4097a1e43917fd5c3f2aae1ab
> > https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> > 1b8df573c9#diff-ced3f0d25217ef63c2f2ea09a8b60e92
> >
> > @Thiru: To be 100% sure: You agree with changing these two files to the
> > Apache license?
> >
> > Niels Basjes
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sean Busbey  wrote:
> >
> >> In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has modified
> >> the files.
> >>
> >> On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:
> >>
> >> > Have these files made it into a release?
> >> >
> >> > On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Zoltan,
> >> >>
> >> >> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way
> >> to
> >> >> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those
> files
> >> >> files having a new license header.
> >> >> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this
> >> should
> >> >> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
> >> >>
> >> >> What do you guys think about this approach?
> >> >>
> >> >> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much
> more
> >> >> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate
> >> profile
> >> >> of maven)
> >> >>
> >> >> Niels Basjes
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas
> >> >>  >> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
> >> >> > Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is
> currently
> >> >> dual
> >> >> > licensed with LGPL and Apache .
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate
> >> Apache
> >> >> > header.
> >> >> > Let me know if you need me to do anything.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thank you
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --z
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes 
> wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Hi all,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files
> are
> >> >> not
> >> >> > > Apache licensed.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> >> >> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet
> >> some
> >> >> > have
> >> >> > > this:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > /*
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > * Copyright 

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Niels Basjes]

Hi all,

After we hear back from Thiru I would like Zoltan to fix these 4 files.

lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/SchemaVisitor.java
lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/Schemas.java
lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/CloningVisitor.java

See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2118

After those have been fixed we can commit this change (guys, please review
this. Thanks.)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2119

Niels Basjes


On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I had a closer look at the code base.
>
> Most important:
> 1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
> 2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are NOT
> present in any of those releases. (
> So we're ok on this part.
>
> I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
> ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
> ./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/
> schema/SchemaVisitor.java
>
> I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:
>
> https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> 1b8df573c9
>
> commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
>> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
>> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
>> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
>> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted the code
>
>
> In both these files the only changes are:
> - Removing the author tag
> - Whitespace changes.
>
> See:
> https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> 1b8df573c9#diff-d0adffb4097a1e43917fd5c3f2aae1ab
> https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f
> 1b8df573c9#diff-ced3f0d25217ef63c2f2ea09a8b60e92
>
> @Thiru: To be 100% sure: You agree with changing these two files to the
> Apache license?
>
> Niels Basjes
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sean Busbey  wrote:
>
>> In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has modified
>> the files.
>>
>> On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:
>>
>> > Have these files made it into a release?
>> >
>> > On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Zoltan,
>> >>
>> >> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way
>> to
>> >> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those files
>> >> files having a new license header.
>> >> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this
>> should
>> >> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
>> >>
>> >> What do you guys think about this approach?
>> >>
>> >> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much more
>> >> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate
>> profile
>> >> of maven)
>> >>
>> >> Niels Basjes
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas
>> >> > >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
>> >> > Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently
>> >> dual
>> >> > licensed with LGPL and Apache .
>> >> >
>> >> > We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate
>> Apache
>> >> > header.
>> >> > Let me know if you need me to do anything.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thank you
>> >> >
>> >> > --z
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Hi all,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are
>> >> not
>> >> > > Apache licensed.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
>> >> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet
>> some
>> >> > have
>> >> > > this:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > /*
>> >> > >
>> >> > > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
>> >> > > *
>> >> > > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>> >> > > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
>> >> > > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
>> >> > > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later
>> version.
>> >> > > *
>> >> > > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> >> > > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> >> > > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> >> > > * GNU General Public License for more details.
>> >> > > *
>> >> > > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
>> >> > > * License along with this 

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Niels Basjes]

Hi all,

I had a closer look at the code base.

Most important:
1) I have found these files only in the master branch.
2) I checked both release 1.8.2 and 1.7.7 and in these files are NOT
present in any of those releases. (
So we're ok on this part.

I have found exactly 2 files with this problem:
./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/SchemaVisitorAction.java
./lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema/SchemaVisitor.java

I have found 1 additional commit that touches these two files:

https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9

commit 9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9
> Author: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> AuthorDate: Sun Apr 30 21:02:02 2017 +0530
> Commit: Thiruvalluvan M G 
> CommitDate: Sun Apr 30 23:31:29 2017 +0530
> Added more tests and fixed a couple of bugs. Also formatted the code


In both these files the only changes are:
- Removing the author tag
- Whitespace changes.

See:
https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9#diff-d0adffb4097a1e43917fd5c3f2aae1ab
https://github.com/apache/avro/commit/9132015450a2ad6f56cd582b393e8f1b8df573c9#diff-ced3f0d25217ef63c2f2ea09a8b60e92

@Thiru: To be 100% sure: You agree with changing these two files to the
Apache license?

Niels Basjes


On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sean Busbey  wrote:

> In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has modified
> the files.
>
> On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:
>
> > Have these files made it into a release?
> >
> > On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
> >
> >> Zoltan,
> >>
> >> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way to
> >> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those files
> >> files having a new license header.
> >> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this
> should
> >> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
> >>
> >> What do you guys think about this approach?
> >>
> >> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much more
> >> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate
> profile
> >> of maven)
> >>
> >> Niels Basjes
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas
> >>  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
> >> > Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently
> >> dual
> >> > licensed with LGPL and Apache .
> >> >
> >> > We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate Apache
> >> > header.
> >> > Let me know if you need me to do anything.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you
> >> >
> >> > --z
> >> >
> >> > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi all,
> >> > >
> >> > > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are
> >> not
> >> > > Apache licensed.
> >> > >
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> >> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> >> > >
> >> > > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet
> some
> >> > have
> >> > > this:
> >> > >
> >> > > /*
> >> > >
> >> > > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> >> > > *
> >> > > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> >> > > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> >> > > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> >> > > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> >> > > *
> >> > > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> >> > > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> >> > > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> >> > > * GNU General Public License for more details.
> >> > > *
> >> > > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> >> > > * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free
> Software
> >> > > * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA
> >> 02111-1307,
> >> > USA.
> >> > > */
> >> > >
> >> > > And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/r
> >> esolved.html#category-x
> >> > the
> >> > > LGPL is not allowed to be included.
> >> > >
> >> > > How do we fix this problem?
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> >> > >
> >> > > Niels Basjes
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> >>
> >> Niels Basjes
> >>
> >
>



-- 
Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,

Niels Basjes

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Sean Busbey]

In addition to Zoltan we'll need to confirm anyone else who has modified
the files.

On Dec 13, 2017 11:46, "Sean Busbey"  wrote:

> Have these files made it into a release?
>
> On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:
>
>> Zoltan,
>>
>> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way to
>> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those files
>> files having a new license header.
>> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this should
>> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
>>
>> What do you guys think about this approach?
>>
>> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much more
>> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate profile
>> of maven)
>>
>> Niels Basjes
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
>> > Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently
>> dual
>> > licensed with LGPL and Apache .
>> >
>> > We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate Apache
>> > header.
>> > Let me know if you need me to do anything.
>> >
>> > Thank you
>> >
>> > --z
>> >
>> > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are
>> not
>> > > Apache licensed.
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
>> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
>> > >
>> > > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some
>> > have
>> > > this:
>> > >
>> > > /*
>> > >
>> > > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
>> > > *
>> > > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>> > > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
>> > > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
>> > > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
>> > > *
>> > > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> > > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> > > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> > > * GNU General Public License for more details.
>> > > *
>> > > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
>> > > * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
>> > > * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA
>> 02111-1307,
>> > USA.
>> > > */
>> > >
>> > > And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/r
>> esolved.html#category-x
>> > the
>> > > LGPL is not allowed to be included.
>> > >
>> > > How do we fix this problem?
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
>> > >
>> > > Niels Basjes
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
>>
>> Niels Basjes
>>
>

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Sean Busbey]

Have these files made it into a release?

On Dec 13, 2017 10:18, "Niels Basjes"  wrote:

> Zoltan,
>
> Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way to
> approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those files
> files having a new license header.
> That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this should
> be a separate jira to document this clearly.
>
> What do you guys think about this approach?
>
> @Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much more
> often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate profile
> of maven)
>
> Niels Basjes
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas
>  > wrote:
>
> > Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
> > Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently dual
> > licensed with LGPL and Apache .
> >
> > We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate Apache
> > header.
> > Let me know if you need me to do anything.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > --z
> >
> > > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are not
> > > Apache licensed.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> > >
> > > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some
> > have
> > > this:
> > >
> > > /*
> > >
> > > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> > > *
> > > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> > > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > > *
> > > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> > > * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > > *
> > > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > > * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> > > * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA
> 02111-1307,
> > USA.
> > > */
> > >
> > > And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > the
> > > LGPL is not allowed to be included.
> > >
> > > How do we fix this problem?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> > >
> > > Niels Basjes
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
>
> Niels Basjes
>

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Niels Basjes]

Zoltan,

Because the copyright notice now says you own it I guess the best way to
approach this is is when you put up a pull request with all those files
files having a new license header.
That way it is clear that you made the license switch. I think this should
be a separate jira to document this clearly.

What do you guys think about this approach?

@Nandor / Gabor: I'll put up a ticket that we should run rat much more
often (for both 1.8 and master). (i.e. no longer only in separate profile
of maven)

Niels Basjes


On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Zoltan Farkas  wrote:

> Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
> Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently dual
> licensed with LGPL and Apache .
>
> We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate Apache
> header.
> Let me know if you need me to do anything.
>
> Thank you
>
> --z
>
> > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are not
> > Apache licensed.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> >
> > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some
> have
> > this:
> >
> > /*
> >
> > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> > *
> > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > *
> > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> > * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > *
> > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> > * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307,
> USA.
> > */
> >
> > And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> the
> > LGPL is not allowed to be included.
> >
> > How do we fix this problem?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> >
> > Niels Basjes
>
>


-- 
Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,

Niels Basjes

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Zoltan Farkas]

Hi Niels, the license is a mistake made by me.
Those files were based from my work on spf4j-avro which is currently dual 
licensed with LGPL and Apache .

We should just replace the license headers with the appropriate Apache header.
Let me know if you need me to do anything. 

Thank you 

--z

> On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are not
> Apache licensed.
> 
> https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> 
> Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some have
> this:
> 
> /*
> 
> * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> *
> * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> *
> * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> * GNU General Public License for more details.
> *
> * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA.
> */
> 
> And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x the
> LGPL is not allowed to be included.
> 
> How do we fix this problem?
> 
> -- 
> Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> 
> Niels Basjes

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Gabor Szadovszky]

+1

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Nandor Kollar  wrote:

> I've one question regarding this: why do we execute Rat plugin *only* in
> rat profile, is there any specific reason? Should include this into test
> phase, so Maven test would fail, thus we can avoid similar problems?
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Niels Basjes  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are not
> > Apache licensed.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> > compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
> >
> > Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some
> have
> > this:
> >
> > /*
> >
> > * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> > *
> > * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> > * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> > * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> > *
> > * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> > * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > *
> > * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> > * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> > * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307,
> > USA.
> > */
> >
> > And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> the
> > LGPL is not allowed to be included.
> >
> > How do we fix this problem?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
> >
> > Niels Basjes
> >
>

Re: Licensing problem (LGPL in codebase!!)

[Nandor Kollar]

I've one question regarding this: why do we execute Rat plugin *only* in
rat profile, is there any specific reason? Should include this into test
phase, so Maven test would fail, thus we can avoid similar problems?

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Niels Basjes  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I was going through the codebase and I found that several files are not
> Apache licensed.
>
> https://github.com/apache/avro/tree/master/lang/java/
> compiler/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/compiler/schema
>
> Some of these files do not have a copyright block (fixable), yet some have
> this:
>
> /*
>
> * Copyright (c) 2001 - 2016, Zoltan Farkas All Rights Reserved.
> *
> * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> *
> * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> * GNU General Public License for more details.
> *
> * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> * License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> * Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307,
> USA.
> */
>
> And according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x the
> LGPL is not allowed to be included.
>
> How do we fix this problem?
>
> --
> Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten,
>
> Niels Basjes
>