Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

[Димитриј Мијоски]

Really appreciate we resolved this. I have learned greatly. My mistake was 
really unintentional, I was not aware of possible consequences. Still would you 
be interested in making short video call to clear all doubts. We are available 
to do this right now.

On 21.11.2017 13:57, Németh László wrote:
Hi,

2017-11-17 19:44 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски 
<dm...@hotmail.com<mailto:dm...@hotmail.com>>:
> Reverted.
> https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/commit/58dfe79637982c5c49658c57c3b01d4f44c07c19
> I guess everybody should be happy now. Life goes on. I won't touch
> version 1 code any more.

Thanks for reverting.

2017-11-18 1:00 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски 
<dm...@hotmail.com<mailto:dm...@hotmail.com>>:

@ everyone in this thread

Ok, can we conclude now. V1 is tri-license back as it was, V2 will be
LGPLv3 only, for the time being. I did the change because I wanted to
link V2 into V1, to have full backward compatibility. But, I gave it an
additional though and there is a simple solution to link V1 into V2 and
keep the whole package backward compatible (including ABI).

Once V2 is finished, if you like it, put it in LibreOffice. If you don't
like it, don't do it. We are really trying hard to make a good product.

This is not an option, because Hunspell development is part of LibreOffice.
Authors and main contributors are all LibreOffice (OpenOffice.org) developers.
Caolán and me used GitHub only as a git repository for Hunspell, fixing
Hunspell problems mostly reported by LibreOffice users.
Driving force and main target of Hunspell development is still LibreOffice.


I apologize for any inconveniences I created.

Thanks.

To solve this unfortunate situation, please, separate your "hunspell2" project
under a different gitHub project and name, without using "Hunspell" or
"Hunspell v2" titles for it.

This will help me a lot to continue Hunspell developments for LibreOffice
in the next few weeks and later.

Best regards,
Laszlo


Cheers,
Dimitrij.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org>
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

[Димитриј Мијоски]

Hello Németh László,

hopefully you noticed that I fixed the issue you raised and reverted 
things to where they were.

Considering all the input, would you be interested in updating the 
license to MPL version 2. That license can be practically used as a 
drop-in replacement of the tri-license and keep compatibility with all 
users. Mozilla did exactly this for Firefox. Few years ago they were 
using the the tri-license and they updated to MPLv2. Libreoffice already 
uses MPLv2.

In the spirit of moving forward and modernizing, I think this change 
will only simplify things for everyone. I will put version 2 under MPL 2 
if we agree on this.

Best regards,
Dimitrij.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

[Димитриј Мијоски]

On 17.11.2017 22:48, Wol's lists wrote:
> Except that LGPL2 at least contains bugs that result in 
> unexpected/unwanted liabilities.
>
Maybe that's why it got updated to LGPL v3? I have not read v2, i know 
only v3 and look fine to me.
> Some projects avoid (L)GPL on political grounds.
>
I personally don't understand this avoidance of GNU licenses. I do 
understand that some people find GNU GPL a "strict" license. But then, 
what should we say about proprietary EULAs of Microsoft? Isn't that 
strict, yet still people use those products. Looking at those ends, LGPL 
really is a liberal license. Whoever wanted to criticize it, please read 
it. One should always remember that if it were not for GNU and it's 
public licenses, FLOSS may not even exist.

-

@ everyone in this thread

Ok, can we conclude now. V1 is tri-license back as it was, V2 will be 
LGPLv3 only, for the time being. I did the change because I wanted to 
link V2 into V1, to have full backward compatibility. But, I gave it an 
additional though and there is a simple solution to link V1 into V2 and 
keep the whole package backward compatible (including ABI).

Once V2 is finished, if you like it, put it in LibreOffice. If you don't 
like it, don't do it. We are really trying hard to make a good product.

I apologize for any inconveniences I created.

Cheers,
Dimitrij.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

[Димитриј Мијоски]

Reverted.
https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/commit/58dfe79637982c5c49658c57c3b01d4f44c07c19
I guess everybody should be happy now. Life goes on. I won't touch 
version 1 code any more.

On 17.11.2017 15:21, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> But not Apache, for example.
>
Can you explain how is this? LGPL library can be linked dynamically to 
any application with "incompatible" license (not sure if that was the 
wording).


On 17.11.2017 16:23, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> With LibreOffice being one of the major downstream consumers of
> hunspell, we are concerned about this - so_if_  you're pondering to
> reduce the number of licenses (which at any rate should be agreed on
> amicably between the project maintainers), why not pick the MPL
> instead?
I will see at later stages if LGPLv3/MPLv2 is a good option, for V2.


On 17.11.2017 16:54, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> Why not add hunspell2 (or junspell) as a new work in a new repository
> at that higher level, move src/hunspell2 from hunspell to the new repo
> and copy whatever shared stuff is needed. Restore the old license stuff
> for the classic hunspell repository and work away on the successor in
> the separate repo under the hunspell umbrella.
I will see later.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

[Димитриј Мијоски]

Hello Nemeth Laszlo,


I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1 or later, 
which safely allows us to put out derivative work to LGPLv3. And also, ALL 
copyright notices were kept.

You can answered much earlier, we created issues both about Mozilla funding and 
about relicensing months ago and NOBODY replied.

I can assure you, the library is in good hands. There will be FULL backward 
comparability with the dictionary format. Also, FULL backward compatibility 
with the library API will be kept. 
https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/issues/543 As we develop new stuff, we 
will replace old stuff with new stuff incrementally. At some point I was 
thinking to make v2 with breaking changes but saw it is not a good path. 
Basically, if everything goes good, v2 spelling and suggestions will be done by 
new code, and stemming by the old code. We will rewrite our documents 
accordingly.


As for the license, I really don't see what is the problem with LGPLv3. It is a 
very open license which allows the library to be used pretty much everywhere, 
including application with more stricter licenses like GPL and proprietary 
licenses, and in more liberal licenses like BSD and MIT.


Again, the library is in good hands. If you want I can even show you my 
computer science degree with the grades.


From: Németh László 
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 6:19:45 PM
To: Dimitrij Mijoski; PanderMusubi
Cc: libreoffice-dev
Subject: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

Hi,

A week ago you modified Hunspell’s license in the official Hunspell repository
without permission of the author, me, and the main contributor and maintainer,
Caolán McNamara.

==
commit d49170ce949dbe0d2e6ad74b6b876e5580704a5e
Author: Dimitrij Mijoski >
Date:   Wed Nov 8 18:30:29 2017 +0100

License everything under LGPLv3+. No more three licenses mumbo jumbo.

commit 6ff9a6fb5a63ee63294131eba7ce4e67624dffa5
Author: PanderMusubi 
>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 16:45:35 2017 +0100

improved copyright and authors
==

Free licenses and rich functionality helped Hunspell equally to
spread better multilingual spell checking among desktop and web
applications, so I don’t plan to replace the recent MPL/LGPL/GPL
tri-license with LGPL 3.

Moreover, it’s misleading to refer yourselves as the authors of Hunspell
(see your change in Hunspell’s AUTHORS file), when you are contributors
of the project.

If I right think, these modifications are related to your Mozilla funded 
Hunspell
development, in which, unfortunately, I wasn’t able to take part in it,
and I didn’t follow  your Mozilla application last year. I read about its 
success(?)
and your plan to create a spell checker from scratch only a few weeks ago.
(You have informed Caolán and me only about the first steps of the application,
if I right know.)

From its name and place in Hunspell repository, “Hunspell 2” is a
future replacement or successor of Hunspell library and command-line
executable, but it seems, it’s more like a fork of Hunspell development
efforts. According to your plan: “That aim for Hunspell 2.0 is to
recreate the most common functionality in Hunspell 1, and that is
detection and correction of spelling errors.”

Reimplementing a subset of the features and dropping dictionary formats
can result worse spell checking and dictionary incompatibilities between
applications (as I see in the case of Hungarian dictionary in your
project).

“Hunspell 2” won’t contain functions used by LibreOffice, main
target of Hunspell development. For example, every thesaurus uses Hunspell
for stemming, some of them also for morphological generation.

You promise the same spelling as in Hunspell, but you’ve already removed
all unit tests of Hunspell library to the dictionary “v1cmdline”.

Spell checking of LaTeX, HTML/XML and OpenDocument files will be also
“dropped” in your development, but this is a basic function of the
targeted academic publishing and automatized command-line document editing.

As the author of the half of Hunspell’s code base (the second half is
the work of Kevin Hendricks, author of MySpell), I don’t believe your
incomplete rewriting from scratch is a viable option with your limited
resources and experience (one C++ developer, insufficient knowledge
of the aim, usage and implementation of Hunspell features and
dictionaries).

[For example, you wrote the following about the LANG option of Hunspell
affix file in your analysis: “In the source code is no implementation
existing. Deprecate this option?”, while this option is really used
several places in language-specific parts of Hunspell. I have just added
support for special casing of Crimean Tatar language (extending the
Turkish and Azeri support – those were mentioned in Hunspell(5)