Re: Jakarta POI audit.
In summary, there are no controversial licensing issues for the Jakarta POI project itself. The only area of question is whether Centipede's use of LGPL libraries and POI's use of Centipede as a build tool constitutes a problem. We are eager to resolve this in the event the board sees this as a problem. It is our preference to continue using checkstyle unless there is an actual legal issue. (Not looking at centepede here) : POI can even use GPL for building. There is an exception when a buildtool adjusted the content of the thing it processes (don't get me on legal stuff here though :). It is written down in the gpl fag on fsf.org. httpd else would have to be gpl too, since it may use gpl'ed buildtools to get it build, which is clearly not the case. Mvgr, Martin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Jakarta POI audit.
Excellent. It took me about 15 minutes to prepare this audit. Because I take my responsibility as a: member (including my oversight responsibility) Jakarta PMC member committer developer POI-person good citizen of the Apache community seriously, I intend to perform this audit at least quarterly. I'll always have them available on the wiki page so that my peers can review them: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPOIAudits I've also created this page: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFAuditPages for others who wish to do the same. I expect to get a softer pillow out of this. Meaning because I know that I've done my work and that my peers have reviewed it, I know that POI won't be shut down due to liability concerns, that the Apache project's furture is protected and that non-member committers to POI can rest assured that we've done our best to protect their contribution. I intend to invite other POI committers to either perform the audits or collaborate on them (since its 15 minutes work I imagine the first will be more common). This will help prevent the ya ya effect of form-filling/cutting-pasting. I invite anyone who has a question about the audit or is interested in how to apply the same on their project to please write. I'll do my best to answer any questions. Thanks, Andy - Original Message - From: Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:29 AM Subject: Re: Jakarta POI audit. Martin van den Bemt wrote: In summary, there are no controversial licensing issues for the Jakarta POI project itself. The only area of question is whether Centipede's use of LGPL libraries and POI's use of Centipede as a build tool constitutes a problem. We are eager to resolve this in the event the board sees this as a problem. It is our preference to continue using checkstyle unless there is an actual legal issue. (Not looking at centepede here) : POI can even use GPL for building. There is an exception when a buildtool adjusted the content of the thing it processes (don't get me on legal stuff here though :). It is written down in the gpl fag on fsf.org. httpd else would have to be gpl too, since it may use gpl'ed buildtools to get it build, which is clearly not the case. Agreed. - Sam Ruby - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jakarta POI audit.
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPOIAudits/20030205 Although its not official, I'm more or less the defacto current member in charge of oversight for Jakarta POI. Because there seem to be questions on a number of projects as to their license usage, I thought it would be nice for me to go and audit POI voluntarily. Although I do not like such issues as licenses and other things, I realize that staying legitmate affects you my peers and all of Apache and I do this as a service to protect myself as well as all of you (you're welcome). The Jakarta POI project uses the following: under various subdirs of /lib 1. Commons Logging * (http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging.html) ASL 2. log4-j * (http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j) ASL 2. Xalan 2.2 ** (http://xml.apache.org/xalan) ASL 3. Xerces 2.2 ** (http://xml.apache.org/xerces) ASL Although the following are not required for POI, they are used/provided by Centipede (http://krysalis.org/centipede) at build time and for generating our site: under /tools/cents 1. Primarily these are centipede tools I am not delineating those as they are just part of centipede 2. checkstyle - LGPL (http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/) - I was unaware of this before the audit. Apparently Centipede uses this to produce this: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/metrics/checkstyle/ - I do not personally find checkstyle useful but other developers on the project (namely Nicola ken) do. It is my personal understanding that this is acceptable provided that POI does not directly reference them nor the jar include or require them. I would like direction from the board whether the use of build tools which use LGPL is OK (POI itself does not use LGPL). If the board requests I will disable the use of checkstyle (which will make Nicola Ken cry). Also I would like guidence on whether just leaving it out of our CVS repository and letting it be downloaded at build time is fine. (it is the build and not POI which is using it) 3. javasrc - NO LICENSE (public domain) - (http://home.austin.rr.com/kjohnston/javasrc.htm) 4. jdepend - BSD - (http://www.clarkware.com/software/JDepend.html) 5. junit - IBM CPL - (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ibmpl.php) 6. umldoclet - Public Domain - (http://objectclub.esm.co.jp/uml-doclet/README) * loaded optionally via some JVM parameters ** used for centipede and XML-Java record (value object of sorts) generation in the build In summary, there are no controversial licensing issues for the Jakarta POI project itself. The only area of question is whether Centipede's use of LGPL libraries and POI's use of Centipede as a build tool constitutes a problem. We are eager to resolve this in the event the board sees this as a problem. It is our preference to continue using checkstyle unless there is an actual legal issue. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing this audit. Because I value your time, I will keep this on the wiki and provide updates. You may find them here: http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPOIAudits - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
