Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 30/06/2018 à 11:33, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : The issue here is that you clearly know what my position is (you quoted it) and you decided somehow that you have lazy consensus! When I wrote about the lazy consensus, I did not clearly remember your position. Because in the meantime we

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

The issue here is that you clearly know what my position is (you quoted it) and you decided somehow that you have lazy consensus! Anyway, I don't see a problem in reverting to 2.1.7 as scott suggested, but I suggest the comment to be simply "Will not update due to license change in newer

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

I guess you mean Le 12/06/2018 à 15:54, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : I'm no longer interested in discussing this, I already explained it. -1 on the comment -1 on the removal +1 on excluding the transitive dependency If you want to fix things for BIRT, I recommend you do it_outside_ the

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Ahh, so you just decided to ignore my input? On Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 3:28 PM Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Hi All, > > Do we need a vote here to decide if we should ask infra or not? > > Else I'll tomorrow consider the last exchange with Scott 2 weeks ago a > lazy consensus and will simply replace

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Hi All, Do we need a vote here to decide if we should ask infra or not? Else I'll tomorrow consider the last exchange with Scott 2 weeks ago a lazy consensus and will simply replace using     -    compile 'com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0'     +   compile 'com.lowagie:itext:2.1.7' // don't update

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 14/06/2018 à 21:43, Scott Gray a écrit : Are there any genuine doubts about 2.1.7? Or just a warning from the company trying to sell the AGL licensed versions? If we revert back to 2.1.7 then I don't think we need to ask legal anything. Yes that's also my opinion after deeply checking.

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Are there any genuine doubts about 2.1.7? Or just a warning from the company trying to sell the AGL licensed versions? If we revert back to 2.1.7 then I don't think we need to ask legal anything. Regards Scott On 14 June 2018 at 18:56, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Le 14/06/2018 à 07:22, Scott

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 14/06/2018 à 07:22, Scott Gray a écrit : My first inclination is that taking legal advice from a company that is trying to sell you a license, probably isn't a good idea. They have a vested interest in trying to convince you not to use the MIT version. Regardless, I think Taher's solution

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

My first inclination is that taking legal advice from a company that is trying to sell you a license, probably isn't a good idea. They have a vested interest in trying to convince you not to use the MIT version. Regardless, I think Taher's solution works in the short term and the other

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Hi Jacopo, Yes good idea. I'll try to write next week... Jacques Le 13/06/2018 à 08:14, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: [...] Of course we need to ask the legal team before taking a formal decision about

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:47 PM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > [...] > Of course we need to ask the legal team before taking a formal decision > about it. > I think we have now enough material to ask, and without opposition I'll > create a LEGAL Jira in a week. I

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Thanks for your report Scott, After checking as much as I can, here are my conclusions: As you reported "com.itextpdf:itextpdf:5.5.6" can't be used, it's AGPL so incompatible with ASL2 Taher suggested to simply exclude loading it. So only loading "com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0" which is MPL/GPL

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

And for those who are not convinced: https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/can-i-use-itext-without-respecting-agpl-license jacques Le 12/06/2018 à 18:15, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : That's not serious, remains a legal issue as explained at

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

That's not serious, remains a legal issue as explained at https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/versions-older-than-5 > Our users deserver better than saying that I could fix BIRT. You did not get it, there is nothing to fix in BIRT. It's unrelated.

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

to qualify: +1 on excluding the transitive dependency after testing that it works On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote: > I'm no longer interested in discussing this, I already explained it. > > -1 on the comment > -1 on the removal > +1 on excluding the transitive dependency >

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

I'm no longer interested in discussing this, I already explained it. -1 on the comment -1 on the removal +1 on excluding the transitive dependency If you want to fix things for BIRT, I recommend you do it _outside_ the framework. On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Le

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 12/06/2018 à 14:21, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : com.lowagie.text.* is included in the 3.6.1 BIRT runtime jar that we use, and there is a legal agreement between the BIRT team and Bruno Lowagie to use this version[1]. To be clear here, as you (Taher) outlined, we still need to have in our main

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 12/06/2018 à 11:56, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : First of all, I think it's always a bad idea to "comment out" any code, and the general rule of thumb is to prefer deleting. Mmm, what? I just commented out to test. Your comment makes no sense to me, you could have avoided it. Of course it's to

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

First of all, I think it's always a bad idea to "comment out" any code, and the general rule of thumb is to prefer deleting. Second, the framework and plugins are two separate projects. You cannot crash the standalone framework so that the plugins can work, because you're making the framework

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 11/06/2018 à 20:31, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : There are 18 emails so far in this thread of which 13 are yours. - You mentioned stuff from wikipedia - then you mentioned stuff about licensing - then you switched to birt - then you talked about the author - then you go back to questioning how

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

There are 18 emails so far in this thread of which 13 are yours. - You mentioned stuff from wikipedia - then you mentioned stuff about licensing - then you switched to birt - then you talked about the author - then you go back to questioning how to render PDFs in BIRT - then you talk about your

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

No, I'm suggesting to drop itext as a whole, not only itextpdf. Is it so difficult to read me :-o ? I 1st spoke about "itext/4.2.0" (not itextpdf at all). Then I suggested to remove "it". <> I believe (it's no clear from Birt side) itext is something we drag from the 1st contribution of

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

I'm a bit lost. What are you _exactly_ proposing to do here? Are you suggesting my exclusion syntax above (BTW better remove the version), or are you suggesting something else? On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Le 08/06/2018 à 16:29, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >> >> Are we

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 08/06/2018 à 16:29, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Are we sure there are no legal issues doing so? It seems OK at https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.lowagie/itext/4.2.0 (MPL) But reading https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/versions-older-than-5 which applies also to 4.2.0 (see bottom

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Are we sure there are no legal issues doing so? It seems OK at https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.lowagie/itext/4.2.0 (MPL) But reading https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/versions-older-than-5 which applies also to 4.2.0 (see bottom "Some people claim that they use iText 4.2.0, but

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Thanks Taher! Perfect simple solution. Regards Scott On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 23:19 Taher Alkhateeb, wrote: > So we exclude the transitive dependency in build.gradle and if everything > works then we're fine. > > Syntax: > > compile('com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0') { > exclude

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Flexible Birt reports works as well w/o itext. Not sure though why itext is embedded in Birt and what for it's used It seems used for digital signature and accessibility at least: https://communities.opentext.com/forums/discussion/57615/birt-and-digital-signature

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 08/06/2018 à 15:14, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Actually at least simple Birt PDF files (in ordermgr/control/OrderPurchaseReportOptions)  are rendered w/o itext. Note: of course I removed ALL itext files from Gradle cache

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Actually at least simple Birt PDF files (in ordermgr/control/OrderPurchaseReportOptions)  are rendered w/o itext. I'll try later for more complex ones at birt/control/ListFlexibleReport Jacques Le 08/06/2018 à 14:29, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : One question though: do we need itext to render

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

One question though: do we need itext to render PDF with Birt? I did not test that... Le 08/06/2018 à 14:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : But the problem is still: >But that sounds not good https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/versions-older-than-5 and especially http://lowagie.com/iText

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

But the problem is still: >But that sounds not good https://developers.itextpdf.com/question/versions-older-than-5 and especially http://lowagie.com/iText (the original author) + http://lowagie.com/itext2016 Le 08/06/2018 à 14:21, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Not sure, At least I tried to

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Not sure, At least I tried to create Last3MonthsSalesReport.pdf with compile 'com.lowagie:itext:2.1.7' // don't update because of license change and it works (empty): 2018-06-08 14:16:12,909 |jsse-nio-8443-exec-6 |ScreenFactory |I| Got 8 screens in 0.006s from:

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Oops you were clear, my bad. That's indeed an issue and we can't force itext 4.2.0 to use another compatible itextpdf version. Because itext 4.2.0 has a dependency on itextpdf from start and itextpdf is AGPL from start https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.lowagie/itext

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

So we exclude the transitive dependency in build.gradle and if everything works then we're fine. Syntax: compile('com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0') { exclude 'com.itextpdf:itextpdf:5.5.6' } On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 11:40 AM Scott Gray wrote: > Hey Jacques, > > Maybe I wasn't clear, OFBiz is

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Hey Jacques, Maybe I wasn't clear, OFBiz is downloading 5.5.6 as a dependency of 4.2.0, does it make sense? Regards Scott On Fri, 8 Jun 2018, 19:30 Jacques Le Roux, wrote: > I suggest this comment, a Jira seems appropriate > > -compile 'com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0' > +compile

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

I suggest this comment, a Jira seems appropriate -    compile 'com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0' +    compile 'com.lowagie:itext:4.2.0' // don't update to 5+ because of license change Jacques Le 08/06/2018 à 09:26, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Le 08/06/2018 à 09:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi Scott,

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Le 08/06/2018 à 09:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi Scott, Reading Wikipedia It's OK as long as we don't update to a version >= 5  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IText Here is another source for MPL licensing: https://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php/t/175386/

Re: License issue with iText 4.2.0

Hi Scott, Reading Wikipedia It's OK as long as we don't update to a version >= 5  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IText or the GNU Library General Public License open source